Daniels v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

28 federal appellate · 10 district · 2 state decisions

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

1. “'Exhaustion of state judicial or administrative remedies is not a prerequisite to section 1983 actions, except for those cases falling under the narrow exhaustion scheme embodied in [CRIPA]'”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Lewis v. Hillsborough Transit Authority · Floyd Fetner v. The City of Roanoke, a Municipal Corporation Henry v. Bonner, Etc.

2. “... Parratt’s scope cannot easily be limited to negligent deprivations of property. For, if the underlying principle is, as Justice Rehnquist stated in a plurality opinion, that when no practical way to provide a pre-deprivation hearing exists, a post deprivation hearing will satisfy the dictates of procedural due process, then it as well applies to an intentional deprivation for which meaningful prior review was impractical____ [T]here is no practical mechanism by which Virginia could prevent its guards from conducting personal vendettas against prisoners other than by punishing them after the fact, nor have we been given any cause to believe that Virginia courts would be less diligent in protecting prisoners from intentionally inflicted injuries than in protecting them from negligently inflicted injuries.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 586 F. Supp. 1264 - Perry v. Walker

3. “For when a state law creates a cause of action, the State is free to define the defenses to that claim, including the defense of immunity, unless, of course, the state rule is in conflict with federal law.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Davidson v. O'Lone