Sanchez v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
416 F.3d 1051 · 2005
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 15 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 83 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2022 · most notably Douglas v. Independent Living Center of Southern California, Inc. (2012), Watson v. Weeks (2006)
26 federal appellate · 15 district · 8 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
Relies on William Marbury v. James Madison · Maine v. Thiboutot · Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman · Harris v. McRae · Wilder v. Virginia Hospital Assn.
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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress ....”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]hen there is evidence that a State has in place a comprehensive deinstitu-tionalization scheme, which, in light of existing budgetary constraints and the competing demands of other services that the State provides, including the maintenance of institutional care facilities, see Olmstead, 527 U.S. at 597 , 119 S.Ct. 2176 , is “effectively working,” id. at 605 , 119 S.Ct. 2176 , the courts will not tinker with that scheme. Olmstead does not require the immediate, state-wide deinstitutionalization of all eligible developmentally disabled persons, nor that a State’s plan be always and in all cases successful. Id. at 606 , 119 S.Ct. 2176 (“It is reasonable for the State to ask someone to wait until a community placement is available.”) ....”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“are, at best, indirect beneficiaries [of 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(30)(A) ] and it would strain common sense to read § 30(A) as creating a 'right' enforceable by them”
3 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.