Rivera v. Rhode Island’s Empirical Analysis
402 F.3d 27 · 2005
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 47 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 112 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably Centro Medico del Turabo, Inc. v. Feliciano de Melecio (2005), Pagn v. Caldern
30 federal appellate · 47 district · 4 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 Conley v. Gibson · City of Canton v. Harris · County of Sacramento v. Lewis · Joshua Deshaney, a Minor, by His Guardian Ad Litem, and Melody Deshaney,s v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, et al. · Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit
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 112 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]n situations where actors have an opportunity to reflect and make reasoned and rational decisions, deliberately indifferent behavior may suffice to shock the conscience.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“language in DeShaney whether a state action which enhances or creates danger to an individual would provide a separate exception to the general rule of no duty to protect, or whether the language is simply in service of the special relationship exception and provides a set of circumstances where the state's actions might create a”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a State's failure to protect an individual against private violence simply does not constitute a violation of the Due Process Clause.”
4 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.