Scott v. Fischer’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

19 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions

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

1. “Whether Earley itself sufficed clearly to establish the unconstitutionality of administratively imposed PRS for a reasonable New York State correctional official may be open to question inasmuch as two Departments of the New York Appellate Division thereafter continued to find the practice constitutional, conclusions that appear to reflect oversight rather than defiance of Earley. See Garner v. N.Y. State Dep’t of Corr. Servs., 39 A.D.3d 1019 , 831 N.Y.S.2d 923 (3d Dep’t 2007); People v. Thomas, 35 A.D.3d 192 , 826 N.Y.S.2d 36 (1st Dep’t 2006). It was not until 2008 that the New York Court of Appeals held that administrative imposition of PRS by DOC was contrary to law. See Garner v. N.Y. State Dep’t of Corr. Servs., 10 N.Y.3d 358 , 859 N.Y.S.2d 590 , 889 N.E.2d 467 (2008); People v. Sparber, 10 N.Y.3d 457 , 859 N.Y.S.2d 582 , 889 N.E.2d 459 (2008). In circumstances of such apparent judicial confusion as to the constitutional propriety of a statutory mandate, qualified immunity might well continue to shield state officials acting pursuant to that statute. 65”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bentley v. Dennison

2. “[t]he only allegation contained in the complaint that addresses the DOC defendants’ purportedly unconstitutional actions with respect to Scott’s PRS is that they “adopted, approved, and/or ratified the imposition of mandatory [PRS] on individuals such as plaintiff sentenced to determinate terms of imprisonment in New York State courts but not sentenced to mandatory [PRS].” Compl. ¶ 16.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Vincent v. Yelich

3. “Even if this or other circuit courts have not explicitly held a law or course of conduct to be unconstitutional, the unconstitutionality of that law or course of conduct will nonetheless be treated as clearly established if decisions by this or other courts clearly foreshadow a particular ruling on the issue, even if those decisions come from courts in other circuits.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Garcia v. Does 1-40