Jihaad v. O'Brien’s Empirical Analysis
645 F.2d 556 · 1981
Citation profile
32 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2018 · most notably Cleavinger v. Saxner (1985), Spruytte v. Walters (1985)
32 federal appellate · 3 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
Relies on Scheuer v. Rhodes · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Pierson v. Ray · Butz v. Economou · 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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he defendants pled official immunity as an affirmative defense. It was not contested that O’Brien was acting within the scope of his discretionary authority in conducting the hearing. This was sufficient to establish a prima facie case of entitlement. The burden of proving that O’Brien was not entitled to official immunity was then on the plaintiff. The plaintiff failed to show that the defendant was not entitled to immunity under one of the tests set forth in Wood. See Douthit v. Jones, 619 F.2d 527 , 534 (5th Cir.1980). The defendant O’Brien was entitled to judgment under the doctrine of qualified official immunity.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We do not believe that a prison official who conducts an informal disciplinary hearing [resulting in disciplinary segregation] is in one of “those exceptional situations where it is demonstrated that absolute immunity is essential for the conduct of the public business.” Butz v. Economou____ Rather, such an official is covered by the general rule that “in a suit for damages arising from unconstitutional action, federal executive officials exercising discretion are entitled only to qualified immunity____” Butz____”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Juan v. Rafferty“(w)e do not believe that a prison official who conducts an informal disciplinary hearing is in one of 'those exceptional situations where it is demonstrated that absolute immunity is essential for the conduct of the public business' " and proceeded to find for the defendant on his qualified immunity defense. 37 In essence, the inmate in this case appears to have been given none of the "safeguards”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ward v. Johnson
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.