153 Wis. 2d 660 - Saenz v. Murphy’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2201 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Wolff v. McDonnell · Parratt v. Taylor · Kentucky v. Graham
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]nmate reftised to give committee any information, got up and proceeded out of the hearing room. Therefore committee had to totally rely on statements in conduct report.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“no sooner than 2 working days or later than 21 days after the inmate receives a copy of the conduct report.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Smith v. McCaughtry“I plead not guilty, my due process is being violated, I never received notice of the hearing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.