Case Citator › Gibson v. Superintendent of New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety-Division of State Police

Gibson v. Superintendent of New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety-Division of State Police

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Overruled in part
Court
Third Circuit
Citation
411 F.3d 427
Decided
Confirmed treatments
2
Flagged citations read
52 of 52
Citing cases (total)
52
Treatment dates
2010–2024
Overruled in part
A reviewed court has overruled part of this case’s holding. Gibson v. Superintendent of New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety-Division of State Police was overruled in part on when a selective enforcement claim accrues. All 52 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

The Third Circuit held in Dique v. New Jersey State Police that Wallace v. Kato displaced Gibson's rule deferring accrual until a conviction was vacated. The separate qualified immunity and claim-specific Heck discussions continued to be cited; the two confirmed adverse treatments are listed below.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

52 later cases cite Gibson v. Superintendent of New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety-Division of State Police; 52 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Gibson v. Superintendent of New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety-Division of State Police?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Overruled in part

  • The Third Circuit held that Wallace displaced Gibson's rule deferring accrual of a selective enforcement claim until the conviction was set aside.

    Dique v. New Jersey State Police · Third Circuit · filed

    We believe, however, that the Supreme Court’s decision in Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384 (2007), which clarified the Heck rule, extends to Fourteenth Amendment selective-enforcement claims and thus overrides our decision in Gibson.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Declined to follow

  • The Eastern District of Louisiana rejected Gibson's view that a successful selective enforcement damages claim necessarily undermines a prior conviction.

    Odeh v. Butler · Eastern District of Louisiana · filed

    Circuit courts have disagreed as to whether a Section 1983 claim for selective enforcement necessarily calls into question the underlying conviction. For example, the Third Circuit has found that it does because such an argument, if successfully raised during the criminal trial, would have prevented the conviction. ... Gibson v. Superintendent of N.J. Dep’t. of Law and Pub. Safety Div. of State Police, 411 F.3d 427, 440-41 (3d Cir. 2005), overruled on other grounds, Dique v. N.J. State Police, 603 F.3d 181 (3d Cir. 2010). ... Defendants have not shown how, if Odeh were successful on his selective enforcement claim here, his prior conviction would be called into question.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Gibson v. Superintendent of New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety-Division of State Police and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace