Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 165 F.3d 511 - Monfils v. Taylor

Monfils v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis

165 F.3d 511 · 1998

Citation profile

79
cited by 79 later decisions
2
states following
September 2024
most recently cited

33 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 79 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably Buchanan-Moore v. County of Milwaukee (2009), May v. Sheahan (2000)

33 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

5201998200020102020decided

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

Applies 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 · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Joshua Deshaney, a Minor, by His Guardian Ad Litem, and Melody Deshaney,s v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, et al. · Johnson v. Jones

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 79 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “if the state has a 'special relationship' with a person, that is, if the state has custody of a person, thus cutting off alternate avenues of aid.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “What actions did [the state actor] affirmatively take, and what dangers would [the victim] otherwise have faced?”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The basis of a special relationship is that the state has some sort of control or custody over the individual, as in the case of prisoners, involuntarily committed mentally ill persons, or foster children. The state's duty to protect those persons or to provide services for them arises from that custody or control.”
    1 later decision 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.