Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 643 F.2d 1281 - Chavis v. Rowe

Chavis v. Rowe’s Empirical Analysis

643 F.2d 1281 · 1981

Citation profile

175
cited by 175 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
10
states following
October 2024
most recently cited

71 federal appellate · 4 district · 20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 175 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2024 · most notably Cleavinger v. Saxner (1985), Shango v. Jurich (1982)

71 federal appellate · 4 district · 20 state decisions — followed in 10 states

107019811990200020102020decided

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 Brady v. State of Maryland · Wolff v. McDonnell · Bell v. Wolfish · United States v. Agurs · Wood v. Strickland

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

  1. “"... a written record helps to insure that administrators, faced with possible scrutiny by state officials and the public, and perhaps even the courts, where fundamental constitutional rights may have been abridged, will act fairly. Without written records, the inmate will be at a severe disadvantage in propounding his own cause to or defending himself from others."”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “We recognize and consider the resident[']s statement[,] however[,] we accept the reporting officer[']s charges.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[A] written statement ... protect[s] the inmate's substantive due process right not to be found guilty except by an appropriate quantum of evidence ... [and allows] a reviewing court [to] determine whether the finding of guilt was based on substantial evidence or whether it was sufficiently arbitrary as to be a denial of the inmate's due process rights.”
    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.