George v. Parratt’s Empirical Analysis
602 F.2d 818 · 1979
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently May 2015 · most notably Ramos v. Lamm (1980), Coley v. Clinton (1980)
15 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 Younger v. Harris · Wolff v. McDonnell · Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co. · Dombrowski v. Pfister · Starnes v. Penrod Drilling Co.
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Comparing the numerous civil rights cases in which abstention has been held appropriate (footnote omitted) with those cases in which the federal courts have declined to abstain, (footnote omitted), suggests several factors which should be considered by a trial court in deciding whether or not it should abstain. First, what effect will abstention have on the rights to be protected? Another factor to consider in determining whether abstention is appropriate is whether there are available state remedies (footnote omitted). A third factor to be considered is whether the challenged state law is unclear. (footnote omitted). A fourth factor to consider is whether the challenged state law is fairly susceptible of an interpretation that would avoid any federal constitutional question, (footnote omitted) The last factor to consider is whether abstention will avoid unnecessary federal interference in state operations.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“1. What effect will abstention have on the rights sought to be vindicated. 2. Whether there are existing available state remedies. 3. Whether the challenged state law is clear. 4. Whether the challenged state law is fairly susceptible of an interpretation that would avoid any federal constitutional issue. 5. Whether abstention will avoid unnecessary federal interference in state operations.”
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.