Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 928 F.2d 558 - Ruggiero v. Krzeminski

Ruggiero v. Krzeminski’s Empirical Analysis

928 F.2d 558 · 1991

Citation profile

109
cited by 109 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

52 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 109 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2025 · most notably Farrar v. Hobby (1992), Cabrera v. Jakabovitz (1994)

52 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions

7201991200020102020decided

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 Hensley v. Eckerhart · Payton v. New York · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Blum v. Stenson · Pierce v. Underwood

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

  1. “[i]n any civil action under this title, the court in its discretion may allow the recovery of full costs by or against any party other than the United States or any officer thereof. Except as otherwise provided ..., the court may also award a reasonable attorney’s fee to the prevailing party as part of the costs.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]he presumption may cast upon the defendant the duty of producing evidence of consent or search incident to an arrest or other exceptions to the warrant requirement.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[t]he jury's determination that [the Ruggieros'] Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated by the search conducted by the Officers assuredly is significant”
    3 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.