Wyatt v. Aderholt’s Empirical Analysis
503 F.2d 1305 · 1974
Citation profile
66 federal appellate · 14 district · 44 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 206 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2017 · most notably Youngberg v. Romeo Ex Rel. Romeo (1982), Parham v. J. R. (1979)
66 federal appellate · 14 district · 44 state decisions — followed in 17 states
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 Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority · Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education · Cruz v. Beto · Johnson v. Avery · Griffin v. County School Board of Prince Edward County
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 206 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a person involuntarily civilly committed to a state mental hospital has a constitutional right to receive such individual treatment as will give him a reasonable opportunity to be cured or to improve his mental condition.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the only permissible justifications for civil commitment, and for the massive abridgments of constitutionally protected liberties it entails, [are] the danger posed by the individual committed to himself or to others, or the individual's need for treatment and care.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he state may not fail to provide treatment for budgetary reasons alone. "Humane considerations and constitutional requirements are not, in this day, to be measured or limited by dollar considerations." Jackson v. Bishop, 8 Cir.1968, 404 F.2d 571, 580 (Blackmun, J.), quoted, Rozecki v. Gaughan, 1 Cir.1972, 459 F.2d 6, 8 . "Inadequate resources can never be an adequate justification for the state's depriving any person of his constitutional rights." Hamilton v. Love, E.D.Ark.1972, 328 F.Supp. 1182, 1194 .”
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.