Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 71 F.3d 162 - Shakka v. Smith

Shakka v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

71 F.3d 162 · 1995

Citation profile

61
cited by 61 later decisions
July 2024
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably De'Lonta v. Angelone (2003), Williams v. Benjamin (1996)

18 federal appellate · 1 district ·

2701995200020102020decided

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 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Estelle v. Gamble · Farmer v. Brennan · Wilson v. Seiter

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

  1. “[D]eliberate indifference entails something more than mere negligence, ... [but] is satisfied by something less than acts or omissions for the very purpose of causing harm or with knowledge that harm will result.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In the context of a conditions-of-confinement claim, to demonstrate that a deprivation is extreme enough to satisfy the objective component of an Eighth Amendment claim, a prisoner must 'produce evidence of a serious or significant ... injury' ... or demonstrate a substantial risk of such serious harm resulting from the prisoner's unwilling exposure to the challenged conditions....”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the constitutional prohibition against the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment 'does not mandate comfortable prisons, and only those deprivations denying the minimal civilized measure of life's necessities are sufficiently grave to form the basis of an Eighth Amendment violation.'”
    2 later decisions 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.