Durham v. Nu'Man’s Empirical Analysis
97 F.3d 862 · 1996
Citation profile
13 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently April 2024 · most notably Stemler v. City of Florence (1997), Turner v. Scott (1997)
13 federal appellate ·
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 Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Estelle v. Gamble · Hays v. Jefferson County · Stonehenge Insured Notes—I Ltd. Partnership v. Department of Treasury
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the right the official is alleged to have violated must have been 'clearly established1 in a more particularized, and hence more relevant, sense: The contours of the right must have been sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that what he is doing violates the right. This is not to say that an official action is protected by qualified immunity unless the very action in question has previously been held unlawful; but it is to say that in the light of preexisting law the unlawfulness must be apparent.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[f]or a right to be “clearly established,” the contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that his or her conduct violates that right. The unlawfulness of the official or employee’s conduct must be apparent in light of pre-existing law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Waeschle v. Dragovic“We believe it is clear that one who is given the badge of authority of a police officer may not ignore the duty imposed by his office and fail to stop other officers who summarily punish a third person in his presence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Davis v. Rennie
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.