Protection Advocacy for Persons with Disabilities State of Ct v. Mental Health & Addiction Services a 05-1457-Cv’s Empirical Analysis
448 F.3d 119 · 2006
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc. · MCI Telecommunications Corp. v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co. · General Dynamics Land Systems, Inc. v. Cline · National Railroad Passenger Corporation v. Boston & Maine Corp.
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Protection and Advocacy for Individuals with Mental Illness (PAIMI) Program”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“shall ... have access to all records of ... any individual (including an individual who has died or whose whereabouts are unknown) (i) who ... is unable to authorize the system to have such access; (ii) who does not have a legal guardian ...; and (iii) with respect to whom ... there is probable cause to believe that such individual has been subject to abuse or neglect.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“be given access to a defined category of records.... The statutory language cannot reasonably be construed to encompass identical peer review reports in some states but not others. If Congress wished to achieve that result, it needed to enact different statutory language.”
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.