Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 641 F.2d 1117 - Lee v. Downs Lee

Lee v. Downs Lee’s Empirical Analysis

641 F.2d 1117 · 1981

Citation profile

89
cited by 89 later decisions
6
states following
June 2024
most recently cited

38 federal appellate · 4 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably Kent v. Johnson (1987), Norman Charles Oliver v. Wayne Scott, et al. (2002)

38 federal appellate · 4 district · 6 state decisions

27019811990200020102020decided

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

Relies on McCray v. Burrell · 471 F. Supp. 1095 - Forts v. Ward · 44 Or. App. 755 - Sterling v. Cupp · Lee v. Downs

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

  1. “have a special sense of privacy in their genitals, and involuntary exposure of them in the presence of people of the other sex may be especially demeaning and humiliating. When not reasonably necessary, that sort of degradation is not to be visited upon those confined in our prisons.”
    14 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[M]ale prisoners are also entitled to judicial protection of their right of privacy denied by the presence of female guards stationed in positions to observe the men while undressed or using toilets.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “prison officials have a duty to protect prisoners from self-destruction or self-injury”
    3 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.