Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 28 F. Supp. 2d 884 - Beeson v. Fishkill Correctional Facility

28 F. Supp. 2d 884 - Beeson v. Fishkill Correctional Facility’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
June 2012
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 5 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently June 2012 · most notably Douglas Nyhuis v. Janet Reno Eric Holder Kathleen Hawk Director-Bop (2000), Dwight E. Freeman v. Warden Francis Corrections Officer Shoemaker Nurse Kent (1999)

4 federal appellate · 5 district ·

250199820002010decided

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 15 U.S.C. § 78S (§ 19 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 18 U.S.C. § 3626 (§ 20409 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) · 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1997E

Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Farmer v. Brennan · Kentucky v. Graham · Will v. Michigan Department of State Police

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

  1. “the term “civil action with respect to prison conditions” means any civil proceedings arising under Federal law with respect to the conditions of confinement or the effects of actions by government officials on the lives of persons confined in prison, but does not include habeas corpus proceedings challenging the fact or duration of confinement in prison.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “... in any action brought pursuant to [ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ] by an adult convicted of a crime confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility, the court shall, if the court believes that such a requirement would be appropriate and in the interests of justice, continue such a case for a period of not to exceed 180 days in order to require exhaustion of such plain, speedy, and effective administrative remedies as are available.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “[n]o action shall be brought with respect to prison conditions under section 1983 of this title, or any other Federal law, by a prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or correctional facility until such administrative remedies as are available are exhausted.” The Prison Litigation Reform Act (”
    2 later decisions 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.