Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 938 F.2d 565 - Young v. Biggers

Young v. Biggers’s Empirical Analysis

938 F.2d 565 · 1991

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
3
states following
January 2019
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably Kulwicki v. Dawson (1992), Boyd v. Biggers (1994)

15 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions

370199120002010decided

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 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Malley v. Briggs · Imbler v. Pachtman

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

  1. “Public officers are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known. A reasonable person, however, surely would realize that “framing” someone for a crime that he did not commit deprives that person of his constitutional rights. We cannot conclude to a certainty, therefore, that Young cannot recover [from the officers].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “If, on a motion asserting the defense numbered (6) to dismiss for failure of the pleading to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56, and all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 56.”
    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.