Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 927 F.2d 1504 - Ting v. United States

Ting v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

927 F.2d 1504 · 1991

Citation profile

178
cited by 178 later decisions
1
states following
September 2024
most recently cited

57 federal appellate · 10 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 178 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably Act Up!/Portland v. Bagley (1992), Scott v. Henrich (1994)

57 federal appellate · 10 district · 1 state decisions

7101991200020102020decided

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 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2674 · 28 U.S.C. § 2675 · 28 U.S.C. § 2676

Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Anderson v. Creighton · Graham v. Connor · City of Canton v. Harris · Tennessee v. Garner

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

  1. “[t]he non shooting agents may be held liable only if they personally deprived Ting [the plaintiff] of a constitutional right by failing to perform an act which they were legally required to do which was the cause in fact of Ting's injuries.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[tjhat a particular officer may be unsatisfactorily trained will not alone suffice to fasten liability on the city, for the officer’s shortcomings may have resulted from factors other than a faulty training program. It may be, for example, that an otherwise sound program has occasionally been negligently administered. Neither will it suffice to prove that an injury or accident could have been avoided if an officer had had better or more training, sufficient to equip him to avoid the particular injury causing conduct. Such a claim could be made about almost any encounter resulting in injury, yet not condemn the adequacy of the program to enable officers to respond properly to the usual and recurring situation with which they must deal. And plainly, adequately trained officers occasionally make mistakes; the fact they do says little about the training program or the legal basis for holding the city liable.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the agents were positioned around the room away from Burns and Ting and were thus physically incapable of preventing the incidents surrounding the shooting, all of which transpired in a matter of seconds.”
    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.