Hill v. Curcione’s Empirical Analysis
657 F.3d 116 · 2011
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 5 district ·
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from New York Southern District Court)
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1997E
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Estelle v. Gamble · Farmer v. Brennan · Gregg v. Georgia
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 103 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“is an inmate housing area divided into manageable size units typically with single occupancy cells clustered around a common area and secure control booth.” Hill v. Curcione, 657 F.3d 116 , 118 n. 1 (2d Cir.2011). 2 . The State contends Jones”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“requires that the alleged deprivation must be sufficiently serious, in the sense that a condition of urgency, one that may produce death, degeneration, or extreme pain exists.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is well-established that mere disagreement over the proper treatment does not create a constitutional claim. So long as the treatment given is adequate, the fact that a prisoner might prefer a different treatment does not give rise to an Eighth Amendment violation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Grays v. McGrain
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.