Bagley v. Rogerson’s Empirical Analysis
5 F.3d 325 · 1993
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably Whisman v. Rinehart (1997), Collins v. Bellinghausen Collins (1998)
11 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Siegert v. Gilley · Greenholtz v. Inmates of Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex · Kentucky Department of Corrections v. Thompson · Snowden v. Hughes
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If a state law gives me the right to a certain outcome in the event of the occurrence of certain facts, I have a right, by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment, to whatever process is due in connection with the determination of whether those facts exist. This is not at all the same thing as saying that the federal Constitution guarantees me all rights created or conferred upon me by state law. Such a doctrine would turn every state-law violation into a substantive due process claim, a result that would obliterate completely the distinction between state law and the federal Constitution.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“State laws and regulations create a protectable liberty interest only when they (1) “place substantive limitations on the exercise of official discretion;” and (2) contain “ ‘explicit mandatory language’ ” comprising “‘specific directives to the decision maker that if the regulations’ substantive predicate acts are present, a particular outcome must follow.’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“a violation of state law, without more, does not state a claim under the federal Constitution or 42 U.S.C. § 1983.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.