Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 51 F.3d 714 - Murphy v. Walker

Murphy v. Walker’s Empirical Analysis

51 F.3d 714 · 1995

Citation profile

162
cited by 162 later decisions
3
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

63 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 162 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably Hare v. City of Corinth, Miss. (1994), Gutierrez v. Peters (1997)

63 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions

940199520002010decided

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. § 1291 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Estelle v. Gamble · Farmer v. Brennan · Bell v. Wolfish · Catlin v. United States · Missouri v. Continential Insurance Cos.

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.

  1. “Pretrial detainees, who are protected by the Due Process Clause, will state a claim for inadequate medical treatment if they allege deliberate indifference to their serious medical needs.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “accept all the factual allegations in the complaint and draw all reasonable inferences from these facts in favor of the plaintiff.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “We find the allegations of the casual removal of the cast and splint from Murphy’s hand and the failure to take him in for his follow-up examination troubling. A broken hand is a serious injury, and permanent harm or a “fingering disability” could result absent proper evaluation, possible realignment, and treatment. We believe that, in the vast majority of instances, any reasonable officer ought to conclude that a broken hand is a serious injury and that a cast is necessary. Thus, proper follow-up care should have been provided.”
    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.