Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 97 F.3d 107 - Mays v. Sudderth

Mays v. Sudderth’s Empirical Analysis

97 F.3d 107 · 1996

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
5
states following
December 2024
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 2 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably Hart v. O'Brien (1997), Beck v. Texas State Board of Dental Examiners (2000)

9 federal appellate · 2 district · 6 state decisions

2101996200020102020decided

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

Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Malley v. Briggs · Imbler v. Pachtman · Pierson v. Ray

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

  1. “an official acting within the scope of his authority is absolutely immune from a suit for damages to the extent that the cause of action arises from his compliance with a facially valid judicial order issued by a court acting within its jurisdiction.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the common law provided absolute immunity to government officials in their execution of facially valid judicial orders entered by a court of competent jurisdiction,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the nature of the function performed, not the identity of the actor who performed it.”
    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.