Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 821 F.2d 1120 - Johnson v. Pfeiffer

Johnson v. Pfeiffer’s Empirical Analysis

821 F.2d 1120 · 1987

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
April 2008
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently April 2008

9 federal appellate · 2 district ·

140198719902000decided

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 Conley v. Gibson · Haines v. Kerner · Wolff v. McDonnell · Preiser v. Rodriguez · Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. Feeney

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

  1. “In an effort to support the district court's judgment regarding the Parole Board's 'discretionary' use of protest letters on grounds not stated by that court, the defendants suggest that Johnson has failed to allege sufficient facts to state a claim. Noting that the fourteenth amendment guarantees 'equal laws, not equal results,' they argue that a rule permitting such discretion, if applied evenly, presents no constitutional problem. We agree, but note that Johnson's allegations do raise suggestions of invidious, group-based discrimination and infringement of fundamental rights.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[E]ven broad-based challenges to the rules and procedures used by parole boards or disciplinary officials to make decisions that may affect prisoners' dates of release must be pursued in habeas corpus if resolution of the factual and legal allegations necessary to resolve the § 1983 claims would automatically entitle one or more plaintiffs to accelerated release.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “We intimate, of course, no opinion concerning the possibility of his stating a claim for which relief might be granted, or, if he does, the merits of that claim.”
    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.