Brown v. Fortner’s Empirical Analysis
518 F.3d 552 · 2008
Citation profile
25 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably Brown v. City of Golden Valley (2009), Howard v. Kansas City Police Department (2009)
25 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 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 Mitchell v. Forsyth · Farmer v. Brennan · City of Canton v. Harris · Scott v. Harris · Duncan v. Walker
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“accept[ ] as true the facts that the district court specifically found were adequately supported, along with those facts that the district court likely assumed. Where there are questions of fact the district court did not resolve, we determine the facts that it likely assumed by viewing the record favorably to the plaintiff as in any other summary judgment motion.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The uncontested evidence indicates [the correctional officer] knew [the inmate] was shackled and restrained in a manner that prevented him from securing his own seatbelt. Nonetheless, [the correctional officer] rejected [the inmate’s] request for a seatbelt. [The correctional officer] drove recklessly and ignored requests by the inmate passengers in his van for him to slow down. From this evidence, a reasonable jury could conclude that there was a substantial risk of harm to [the inmate] and that [the correctional officer] knew of and disregarded the substantial risk harm. 6 As such, [the inmate] has presented sufficient evidence that [the correctional officer’s] actions may have violated the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“there need not be a case with materially or fundamentally similar facts in order for a reasonable person to know that his or her conduct would violate the Constitution.”
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.