273 F. Supp. 2d 140 - Rolland v. Romney’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 4 district ·
Relationships
Relies on McComb v. Jacksonville Paper Co. · Spallone v. United States · Fortin v. Commissioner of Massachusetts Department of Public Welfare · Langton v. Johnston · Project Basic v. Kemp Phoenix-Griffin Group II Ltd
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]n implementing the May 3, 2002 order — and having more than enough time to do so — Defendants should be well aware of the heightened scrutiny which the court will exercise should Plaintiffs’ concerns about active treatment remain. In short, while the court will deny the instant motion, it will not countenance any further delay in providing service plans and, hence, active treatment. In the words of Defendants’ counsel, each member of Plaintiffs’ class shall be provided active treatment by December SO, 2003, “not one day later.””
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.