Carter v. Buscher’s Empirical Analysis
973 F.2d 1328 · 1992
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently April 2024 · most notably Dickerson v. Mcclellan (1996), Salim I/o v. Proulx (1996)
29 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions
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 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · United States v. Mendenhall · Tennessee v. Garner · California v. Hodari D. · Brower v. County of Inyo
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 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“pre- seizure conduct is not subject to Fourth Amendment scrutiny.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Vanessa Abraham, in Her Own Right and as Administratrix of the Estate of Robert Abraham, Deceased, and on Behalf of Robert Christopher Abraham, Jr., Labreea Von Abraham and Taquan Carey, the Minor Children of Decedent Cna Insurance Company (Intervenor-Plaintiff in d.c.) v. Kimberly Raso, Badge No. 243, Individually and in Her Official Capacity as a Township of Cherry Hill Police Officer the Township of Cherry Hill Cherry Hill Center, Inc. The Rouse Company of New Jersey, Inc. The Rouse Company MacY East Inc. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (Intervenor-Defendant in d.c.) Kimberly Raso Joris Hoogendoorn v. The Estate of Robert C. Abraham, Deceased Vanessa Abraham, Administratrix of the Estate of Robert C. Abraham Vanessa Abraham, Individually MacY Department Store John Doe(s), a Fictitious Name or Names, Jointly Severally or in the Alternative Vanessa Abraham, in Nos. 98-5405. Kimberly Raso Joris Hoogendoorn, in Nos. 98-5406 · 417 F. Supp. 2d 45 - Buchanan Ex Rel. Estate of Buchanan v. Maine“whether it was reasonable for the police to create the circumstances.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The Fourth Amendment, Carter said, prohibits unreasonable seizures not unreasonable, unjustified or outrageous conduct in general.... Therefore, pre-seizure conduct is not subject to Fourth Amendment scrutiny.” Id. (emphasis in original; citations omitted). In Carter, the Seventh Circuit read Garner as beginning its analysis”
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.