Greg Curry v. David Scott’s Empirical Analysis
249 F.3d 493 · 2001
Citation profile
54 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 179 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2021 · most notably Jones v. Bock (2007), Spruill v. Gillis (2004)
54 federal appellate · 2 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 Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Farmer v. Brennan · Hudson v. Palmer
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 179 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“file a grievance against the person he ultimately seeks to sue”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“an internal investigation by an institution's use of force committee...will not substitute for exhaustion through the prison's administrative grievance procedure under Ohio Admin. Code § 5120-9-31”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The claim against Howard, however, is a separate claim, against a separate individual, premised on a separate and independent legal theory. Because Howard was not mentioned in the prisoners’ grievances, [prison officials] did not know that the prisoners specifically had a grievance against him, so [prison officials] had no reason to pursue any claim or disciplinary action against Howard based on the prisoners’ official complaints. As this Court stated in Freeman v. Francis, 196 F.3d at 644, “the importance of using the prison grievance process [is] to alert prison officials to problems.” The plaintiffs’ grievances may have alerted [prison officials] to problems with Scott, but they did not reasonably alert [prison officials] to problems with Howard.”
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.