Leeds v. Watson’s Empirical Analysis
630 F.2d 674 · 1980
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 10 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently August 2013 · most notably Ruiz v. Estelle (1982), Duckworth v. Franzen (1985)
29 federal appellate · 10 district · 5 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)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on Bounds v. Smith · Procunier v. Martinez · Newman v. Piggie Park Enterprises, Inc. · Johnson v. Avery · Ross v. Moffitt
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.
“"[T]he fundamental constitutional right of access to the courts requires prison authorities to assist inmates in the preparation and filing of meaningful legal papers by providing prisoners with adequate law libraries or adequate assistance from persons trained in the law."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Recently an order issued out of the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho condemning the conditions at the Kootenai County Jail, and giving the commissioners of that county directions that prisoners not be kept therein longer than 48 hours. Among the findings and conclusions of that court were the following: "`The toilets, showers, and general conditions of the cells of the Kootenai County Jail are unsanitary and inadequate for the confinement of prisoners for other than very short periods of time. ... . "`The conditions of confinement for pretrial detainees in the Kootenai County Jail are substantially worse than conditions of confinement for convicted felons confined in the Idaho State Penitentiary. "`The totality of conditions in the Kootenai County Jail render the facilities constitutionally unacceptable for confinement. Such confinement constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of prisoners' rights protected by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. "`Confining pretrial detainees in the Kootenai County Jail in conditions substantially worse than the conditions of confinement for convicted felons in the Idaho State Penitentiary, and in the conditions found by the Court, violates pretrial detainees' rights to due process of law and equal protection which are guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States constitution.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mallery v. Lewis“The trial judge recognized the fact that the jail was operating at an overcapacity and he enjoined the confining of more than 14 prisoners at once or for more than 48 hours, subject to a list of exceptions. There is nothing in the plan to assure that the 5 exceptions to the 48-hour rule in the court's Order are not being used in a manner that will permit a total disregard of the meaning and intent of the 48-hour limitation rule. Moreover, the record before us does not reflect whether any of the promised improvements to health and sanitation problems have been implemented. ... .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mallery v. Lewis
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.