Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 468 F. Supp. 2d 1253 - Witherow v. Crawford

468 F. Supp. 2d 1253 - Witherow v. Crawford’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
2
states following
September 2013
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Wolff v. McDonnell · Bell v. Wolfish

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

  1. “there was a legitimate penological reason to intercept the plaintiffs’ outgoing and incoming mail, namely, to investigate whether the plaintiffs were bringing illegal drugs into [the prison]. This investigation was “reasonably designed to promote prison security” by reading the plaintiffs’ mail to keep illegal drugs out of the prison and prevent potential criminal behavior.”
    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.