Mateyko v. Felix’s Empirical Analysis
924 F.2d 824 · 1990
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably Floyd v. Laws (1991), Alexander v. City And County Of San Francisco (1994)
31 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 state decisions
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. § 1988
Relies on Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Hensley v. Eckerhart · City of Canton v. Harris · McKinley v. City of Eloy · Gagne v. Maher
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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“to gauge the prejudicial effect of improper comments.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Where, as here, there has been a decision adverse to plaintiff on the [federal civil rights] claim, section 1988 does not authorize the award of attorney's fees.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“If the inconsistency between special verdict answers is noticed prior to the dismissal of the jury, the district court has the discretion to resubmit the issue to the jury with a request for clarification. Though [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure] 49(a) does not explicitly provide for resubmitting inconsistent special verdict answers, neithér does the rule prohibit it. Permitting the trial court in its discretion to resubmit inconsistent answers for clarification promotes both fairness and efficiency.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Larson v. Neimi
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.