Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 176 Wis. 2d 571 - Casteel v. McCaughtry

176 Wis. 2d 571 - Casteel v. McCaughtry’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
June 2016
most recently cited

24 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2016 · most notably Aicher Ex Rel. LaBarge v. Wisconsin Patients Compensation Fund (2000), 184 Wis. 2d 831 - Irby v. MacHt (1994)

24 state decisions

160199320002010decided

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 Hewitt v. Helms · Zinermon v. Burch · Kentucky Department of Corrections v. Thompson · Smith v. Shettle · 167 Wis. 2d 24 - Kashishian v. Port

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

  1. “'In procedural due process claims, the deprivation by state action of a constitutionally protected interest in 'life, liberty, or property' is not in itself unconstitutional; what is unconstitutional is the deprivation of such an interest without due process of law.'”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “many deficiencies in Adams' case. Adams cannot reasonably contend that he did not know why LWMMIC wished to accept settlement, and we now turn to the type of hearing Adams believes is required. ¶ 64. Procedural due process under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 1 of the Wisconsin Constitution protect against government actions that deprive an individual of life, liberty, or property without due process of the law.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “whether the procedures attendant upon that deprivation were constitutionally sufficient.”
    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.