Brown v. Lynch’s Empirical Analysis
831 F.3d 1146 · 2016
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1432 (§ 321 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Oviatt Waugh v. Pearce Oviatt Waugh · Gibson v. County of Washoe · Fairley v. Luman · Henry A. v. Willden · Tamas v. Department of Social & Health Services
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) a showing of an objectively substantial risk of harm; and (2) a showing that the officials were subjectively aware of facts from which an inference could be drawn that a substantial risk of serious harm existed and (a) the official actually drew that inference or (b) that a reasonable official would have been compelled to draw that inference.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dent v. Sessions“has not established that it would have been reasonable for officials to assume that [aging out] was a necessary or even likely outcome of the decision not to schedule”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dent v. Sessions“deliberately indifferent to whether his application was processed,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dent v. Sessions
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.