Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 509 F.2d 1358 - Morris v. Travisono

Morris v. Travisono’s Empirical Analysis

509 F.2d 1358 · 1975

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
1
states following
April 2001
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 12 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently April 2001 · most notably Wilson v. Attaway (1985), Rennie v. Klein (1981)

18 federal appellate · 12 district · 1 state decisions

1501975198019902000decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 2201 · 28 U.S.C. § 2202 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Wolff v. McDonnell · Morris v. Travisono · Douglas Gomes v. Anthony P. Travisono, Etc., (Two Cases) · Douglas Gomes v. Anthony P. Travisono · Carl B. Hoitt, Jr. v. Joseph C. Vitek, Etc.

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

  1. “At the outset let me point out that no permission of the Court is necessary before prison authorities may temporarily deprive inmates of these due process rights during a period of emergency. Morris v. Travisono, 509 F.2d 1358, 1360 (1st Cir. 1975). As the First Circuit has noted in Hoitt v. Vitek, 497 F.2d 598, 600 (1974), “[EJmergencies, however, cease to be emergencies when they continue indefinitely and inmates cannot be kept confined to their cells indefinitely in alleged violation of their constitutional rights merely on the assertion of the warden that prison security requires it. The unreviewable discretion of prison authorities in what they deem to be an emergency is not open-ended or time unlimited.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Courts are not infallible, and it may take some trial and error before rules are written which establish the best possible balance between an inmate’s rights and the needs of prison security. Morris v. Travisono, 509 F.2d 1358,1361 (1st Cir. 1975).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “what is ... constitutionally necessary and what is not”
    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.