Humphrey v. Cady’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
271 federal appellate · 96 district · 618 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,378 later decisions (64 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2025 · most notably Wainwright v. Sykes (1977), Preiser v. Rodriguez (1973)
271 federal appellate · 96 district · 618 state decisions — followed in 37 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedHill v. Burke (from Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Fay v. Noia · Brown v. Allen · Picard v. Connor · Specht v. Patterson · WILWORDING Et Al. v. SWENSON, WARDEN
Cited together with Addington v. Texas · Jackson v. Indiana · O'Connor v. Donaldson · Baxstrom v. Herold · Vitek v. Jones
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 1,378 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“great enough to justify such a massive curtailment of liberty.”
40 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Parham v. J. R. · Vitek v. Jones“is so clearly distinct from the claims [the petitioner] has already presented to the state courts that it may fairly be said that the state courts have had no opportunity to pass on the claim.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. McCracken v. Frank · Vincent James Landano v. John J. Rafferty, Superintendent, (East Jersey State Prison), Peter Perretti, (Attorney General, State of New Jersey), Leslie Fay Schwartz, (Deputy Attorney General), the Office of the Hudson County Prosecutor, Kearney Police Department, Newark Police Department, Jersey City Police Department and Perth Amboy Police Department, No. 89-5504, Honorable H. Lee Sarokin, U.S. District Court Judge, Nominal Vincent James Landano v. John J. Rafferty, Superintendent, Rahway State Prison, and Irwin I. Kimmelman, Attorney General of the State of New Jersey. Vincent James Landano v. John J. Rafferty, Superintendent (East Jersey State Prison), Peter Perretti, (Attorney General, State of New Jersey), Leslie Fay Schwartz, (Deputy Attorney General), the Office of the Hudson County Prosecutor, Kearney Police Department, Newark Police Department, Jersey City Police Department and Perth Amboy Police Department. Appeal of John J. Rafferty, Superintendent, East Jersey State Prison, and Peter N. Perretti, Jr., Attorney General of New Jersey, in Nos. 89-5625 and 89-5638““Respondent seeks to justify the discrimination [in procedures] on the ground that commitment under the Sex Crimes Act is triggered by a criminal conviction; that such commitment is merely an alternative to penal sentencing; and consequently that it does not require the same procedural safeguards afforded in a civil commitment proceeding. That argument arguably has force with respect to an initial commitment under the Sex Crimes Act, which is imposed in lieu of sentence, and is limited in duration to the maximum permissible sentence. The argument can carry little weight, however, with respect to the subsequent renewal proceedings, which result in five-year commitment orders based on new findings of fact, and are in no way limited by the nature of the defendant’s crime or the maximum sentence authorized for that crime.” (Italics supplied.)”
6 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.