Gant v. Wallingford Board of Education’s Empirical Analysis
195 F.3d 134 · 1999
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 15 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 109 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably Anthony Nicini Jr v. Edward Morra (2000), Back v. Hastings on Hudson Union Free School District (2004)
20 federal appellate · 15 district · 1 state decisions
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
Relies on Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks · Farmer v. Brennan · Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. · Davis, As Next Friend of Lashonda D. v. Monroe County Board of Education 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 109 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the defendant fully appreciated the harmful consequences of that discrimination, because deliberate indifference is not the same as action (or inaction) taken `maliciously or sadistically for the very purpose of causing harm'”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“standard' that transforms every school disciplinary decision into a jury question.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It would be inappropriate to base a finding of discriminatory intent on a defendant’s failure to respond to circumstances that were not actually known to him, even if he reasonably should have known. The Supreme Court has rejected the use of such an objective (“should have known”) test for deliberate indifference in the Title IX context, see Davis, 119 S.Ct. at 1671 ; Gebser, 118 S.Ct. at 1996-99 . ... Of course, a showing that the defendant “should have known” can, in some circumstances, create an inference — at least sufficient to raise a genuine issue — that the defendant did know.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.