Spence v. Staras’s Empirical Analysis
507 F.2d 554 · 1974
Citation profile
73 federal appellate · 12 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 162 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2016 · most notably Carey v. Piphus (1978), Bell v. City of Milwaukee (1984)
73 federal appellate · 12 district · 10 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 Conley v. Gibson · Sullivan v. Little Hunting Park, Inc. · Mackay v. Nesbett · Universal Builders, Inc. v. Clark · Ciuzio v. United States
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 162 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“clear that the deceased had a right, under the Fourteenth Amendment, to be secure in his life and person while confined under state authority.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We do not suggest that the plaintiff ultimately will be able to prove facts entitling her to actual or punitive damages or even that summary judgment procedures may not develop a lack of liability under § 1983 on the part of some or all the defendants. We merely hold that the complaint contains sufficient allegations with regard to damages, regardless of whether the state or the federal rules on damages are applied, to withstand a motion to dismiss which here was broadly sweeping as to all defendants.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“inmate of an Illinois state mental hospital who had been beaten by fellow inmates about twenty times. The complaint alleged that the defendants knew of the beatings and knew that the patient could not call for help or defend himself when attacked. The court held that the complaint stated a cause of action under Sec. 1983, the patient having a right to”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Davis v. Holly
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.