Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 918 F.2d 1017 - Celia v. C O'Malley P

Celia v. C O'Malley P’s Empirical Analysis

918 F.2d 1017 · 1990

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
February 2017
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 4 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently February 2017

8 federal appellate · 4 district ·

100199020002010decided

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))

Relies on Paul v. Davis · Imbler v. Pachtman · Butz v. Economou · Correa-Martinez v. Arrillaga-Belendez · Dartmouth Review v. Dartmouth College

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

  1. “Celia had not alleged facts sufficient to establish a connection between the alleged constitutional violation (viz., the right not to be tried without indictment) and the prosecutors’ defamatory statements____ The complaint thus fails to establish the necessary nexus between the purported independent constitutional violation and the defamatory statements, and, therefore, does not state a claim under § 1983.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “an alleged constitutional violation for which the defendant prosecutor enjoys absolute immunity [such as initiating criminal charges] can provide the plus' needed to satisfy the 'defamation-plus’ test of Paul v. Davis.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the checks inherent in the judicial process, including judicial supervision and the adversarial nature of trial [which] reduce the likelihood of prosecutorial abuse ... [and] mitigat[e] any damages that might result.”
    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.