Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 708 F. Supp. 1451 - Snyder v. Baumecker

708 F. Supp. 1451 - Snyder v. Baumecker’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
8
states following
April 2014
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 11 district · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently April 2014 · most notably Harrow v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America (2002), Douglas v. Delp (1999)

2 federal appellate · 11 district · 10 state decisions

2101989199020002010decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Scheuer v. Rhodes · Estelle v. Gamble · Foman v. Davis · Ex Parte: Edward T Young

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

  1. “The facts alleged to support plaintiffs conclusion that the defendants acted with callousness and indifference to decedent’s serious medical and psychiatric needs show, instead that defendants, once aware of decedent’s mental state, took affirmative steps to isolate him, to provide needed psychiatric care and to place him under a suicide watch to prevent the very tragedy which occurred. The decision to place decedent on a less frequent watch or the failure to recognize that closer observation was needed suggests only negligence, if anything, and does not demonstrate the kind of deliberate conduct of callous indifference necessary to support a § 1983 claim.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A prison official’s obligation to take reasonable measures to guarantee the safety of inmates includes the obligation to take reasonable precautions to protect an inmate from self-inflicted injury where it is known or should have been known that the inmate was a suicide risk. While prison custodians do not have the burden of guaranteeing that inmates will not commit suicide, the fourteenth amendment does impose upon them an obligation not to act with reckless indifference to a prisoner’s vulnerable mental state when the officials know or should know of that prisoner’s suicidal tendencies.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “predicated on an economic interest, while . . . in the case at bar, the attorney was retained to provide a defense to a criminal prosecution, thus making emotional distress, in the latter situation, a reasonably 39 A-0387-11T1 foreseeable consequence of an attorney's malpractice.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.