Wright v. Lovin’s Empirical Analysis
32 F.3d 538 · 1994
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently December 2014 · most notably Wyke v. Polk County School Board (1997), Wooten v. Campbell (1995)
13 federal appellate · 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Joshua Deshaney, a Minor, by His Guardian Ad Litem, and Melody Deshaney,s v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, et al. · Collins v. City of Harker Heights · Kliewer v. New Jersey · Delaware v. New York · United States v. Eichman
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]here is some doubt whether our holding in Cornelius has survived the Supreme Court's recent holding in [Collins].”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a private citizen may hold a government official liable under Section 1983 for deprivations by a third party of the private citizen's due process rights when a special relationship is found to exist between the victim and the third party or between the victim and the government official. Id. at 352-53 . When the duty which arises by virtue of the special relationship is coupled with some degree of culpable conduct on the defendant's part, § 1983 liability attaches. However, absent the relationship,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“According to these circuits, mere compulsory attendance laws do not result in the level of custody envisioned by the Supreme Court in DeShaney . These circuits reason that mandatory attendance at a public high school simply does not restrict one’s liberty in the same sense that incarceration in prison or involuntary commitment in a mental institution does.”
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.