Juna G. Morales v. Wilbut J. Schmidt’s Empirical Analysis
494 F.2d 85 · 1974
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 1992 · most notably Meachum v. Fano (1976), United States v. Bailey (1980)
26 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 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 National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button · Morton v. Ruiz · Juan G. Morales v. Wilbur J. Schmidt · 340 F. Supp. 544 - Morales v. Schmidt
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“State must show on challenge that such restriction is related both reasonably and necessarily to the advancement of a justifiable purpose of imprisonment.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(S)uch procedure could have the effect of avoiding the risk of a constitutional attack on the rules themselves and at the same time afford the prisoner . . . the right to challenge such decisions at an administrative level. A regulation of this sort would aid the prisoner or parolee, the State, and the courts since less resources would be required for all concerned if a matter such as here be first considered at an administrative level rather than in a court.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“This is but one of the flood of constitutional lawsuits by prisoners. These suits have heavily burdened correctional authorities by requiring them to gather and to organize factual information for court pleadings, and to appear occasionally in court. The federal courts are also heavily burdened by this radical addition to their caseloads, and the absence of plaintiffs’ counsel in most cases and the physical restraints upon the plaintiffs frequently render judicial administration unusually difficult. Many of these suits by indigent prisoners are wholly without merit under any view of the facts or the law; many are mischievous; some malicious. The plaintiffs are uninhibited by financial pressures. For many of these plaintiffs, that the very bringing of the suits in such numbers creates a serious problem for correctional authorities and the courts is a matter of indifference, and, perhaps, of wry satisfaction. Morales v. Schmidt, 494 F.2d 85 (7th Cir. 1974).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Smith v. Fenton
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.