Scott v. McCaughtry’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Parratt v. Taylor · Neitzke v. Williams · Hudson v. Palmer · Zinermon v. Burch · Car Carriers, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e should not reject the application of Parrott unless the remedy which an injured party may pursue in state court can readily be characterized as inadequate to the point that it is meaningless or nonexistent and thus, in no way can be said to provide the due process relief guaranteed by the fourteenth amendment.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The Wisconsin system, unlike the situation in Zinermon v. Burch, does not vest such broad discretion to the defendants that it would be predictable that errors of the type complained of by plaintiff would occur.”
1 later decision 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.