Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 529 So. 2d 446 - MacK v. State

529 So. 2d 446 - MacK v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
June 2001
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2001

1 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

80198819902000decided

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)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1997 (Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 1997E

Relies on Marshall v. Norwood

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

  1. “‘Any cause of action’ certainly does not preclude application of the administrative procedures to tort cases. However, a review of the Administrative Remedy Procedure actually adopted and the federal enabling legislation contained in 42 U.S.C. § 1997 reveals that the intent was the establishment of administrative procedures to handle prisoner grievances resulting basically from prison administra-tion_ This obviously was not intended to allow the granting of a monetary judgment for personal injuries_ Although it may be argued that the broad language of La.R.S. 15:1172(A) permits such a result, the procedure actually adopted does not so provide.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.