Ray Rm Rm v. Ej Foltz’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 state decisions

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

1. “When government officials act in a way that knowingly violates a clearly established statutory or constitutional right of which a reasonable person would have known, they are not immune from suit and may be held liable for the damage their actions caused. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818-19 , 102 S.Ct. 2727 , 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). But when these same officials make decisions that do not knowingly violate such rights, they are not required to defend themselves in a lawsuit seeking damages. Id. They are “immune” from suit. Id. We call this defense “qualified immunity” because the official is immune from a damage lawsuit, qualified upon his ability to show that he did not knowingly violate the plaintiffs clearly established constitutional right. Id.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ruffino v. City of Hoover · 903 F. Supp. 2d 1228 - McElroy v. City of Birmingham

2. “"Deliberate indifference is not the same thing as negligence or carelessness. See Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106 , 97 S.Ct. 285 , 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976). On the contrary, the Supreme Court has made clear that a state official acts with deliberate indifference only when he disregards a risk of harm of which he is actually aware. Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 836 , 114 S.Ct. 1970 , 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994) (to be deliberately indifferent a state `official must both be aware of facts from which the inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm exists, and he must also draw the inference ') (emphasis added). ... "Following this guidance, we have stated that in order to establish deliberate indifference, plaintiffs must be able to [establish] that the defendant (1) was objectively aware of a risk of serious harm; (2) recklessly disregarded the risk of harm; and (3) this conduct was more than merely negligent. McElligott v. Foley, 182 F.3d 1248 , 1255 (11th Cir. 1999)."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ex Parte Madison County Bd. of Education

3. “It is clearly established in this circuit that foster children have a constitutional right to be free from unnecessary pain and a fundamental right to physical safety. The state’s action in assuming the responsibility of finding and keeping the child in a safe environment places an obligation on state officials to ensure the continuing safety of that environment. The failure to meet that obligation constitutes a deprivation of liberty under the fourteenth amendment.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 775 F. Supp. 2d 1344 - Smith v. Beasley