Sturdevant v. Haferman’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Haines v. Kerner · Wolff v. McDonnell · Parratt v. Taylor · Will v. Michigan Department of State Police
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the Wisconsin writ of certiorari is a constitutionally inadequate post-deprivation remedy for Sturdevant's alleged constitutional harm.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.