138 F. Supp. 2d 99 - Shaheed-Muhammad v. Dipaolo’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3626 (§ 20409 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) · 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1997 (Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 1997E
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Estelle v. Gamble · Haines v. Kerner · Brown et al. v. Board of Education of Topeka et al.
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Where the harm that is constitutionally actionable is physical or emotional injury occasioned by a violation of rights, § 1997e(e) applies. In contrast, where the harm that is constitutionally actionable is the violation of intangible rights — regardless of actual physical or emotional injury — section 1997e(e) does not govern.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The [defendants] in this case argue that [section 1997e(e)] bars [plaintiffs] action because he is alleging only “mental or emotional injury” without the requisite physical injury. We disagree. [Plaintiff] is not asserting a claim for “mental or emotional injury.” He is asserting a claim for a violation of his First Amendment rights. The deprivation of First Amendment rights entitles a plaintiff to judicial relief wholly aside from any physical injury he can show, or any mental or emotional injury he may have incurred. Therefore, § 1997e(e) does not apply to First Amendment Claims regardless of the form of relief sought.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“are abridged the moment a state silences free speech or prevents a citizen from following the precepts of his religion. While the violation may be accompanied by psychological or even physical injury, the severity of incursion is not necessarily measured in those terms.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Royal v. Kautzky
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.