Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 902 F.2d 524 - Sims v. Mulcahy

Sims v. Mulcahy’s Empirical Analysis

902 F.2d 524 · 1990

Citation profile

167
cited by 167 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
October 2019
most recently cited

87 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 167 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2019 · most notably Albright v. Oliver (1994), McNabola v. Chicago Transit Authority (1993)

87 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

1390199020002010decided

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. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York

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 167 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[n]o party may assign as error the giving or the failure to give an instruction unless the party objects thereto before the jury retires to consider its verdict, stating distinctly the matter objected to and the grounds of the objection.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “objection must be sufficiently detailed to draw the court's attention to the defect [in the jury instruction]”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Where the custom itself does not establish wrongdoing, there must be evidence of a course of events or circumstances that permit an inference of deliberate indifference or tacit authorization of the offensive acts.”
    2 later decisions 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.