Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 893 F.3d 504 - Dean v. Searcey

Dean v. Searcey’s Empirical Analysis

893 F.3d 504 · 2018

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
September 2021
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently September 2021

2 federal appellate · 1 district ·

5020182020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1985

Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Rochin v. People of California · United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co. · Mooney v. Holohan · Ashcroft v. al-Kidd

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “not ... like many Fourth Amendment cases, where the specificity of the rule is especially important because officers will often find it difficult to know how the Constitution applies in the precise situation encountered.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “clearly established law should not be defined at a high level of generality ... it is not necessary, of course, that the very action in question has previously been held unlawful.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the dispositive question is whether there was a fair and clear warning of what the Constitution requires.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.