Lanier v. Fair’s Empirical Analysis
876 F.2d 243 · 1989
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently February 2016 · most notably Dominique v. Weld (1996), Hoffman v. City of Warwick (1990)
15 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions
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 Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Morrissey v. Brewer · Wolff v. McDonnell · Preiser v. Rodriguez · Hewitt v. Helms
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“These rules and procedures clearly indicate that an inmate’s return to higher custody occurs as the result of a violation of one or more enumerated regulations.... And, as in Brennan , an inmate’s expectation under the Massachusetts scheme arises not only from the program rules but from a “community release agreement” and a “community release permit” signed by the inmate and program officials. These documents state that an inmate agrees to be bound by the program rules and that violations of the rules may result in disciplinary action or prosecution. Finally, both the Manual and the CMR’s specifically provide for an “impartial hearing” by the DOC “for reviewing the facts and circumstances [of the termination], and for making appropriate recommendations regarding future placement.” 103 CMR 420 .07(7)(d); Manual, section 4.5(a)(7). Lanier, 876 F.2d at 248 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dominique v. Weld“that particularized standards or criteria guide the State’s decisionmakers. If the decisionmaker is not required to base its decisions on objective and defined criteria, but instead can deny the requested relief for any constitutionally permissible reason or for no reason at all, ... the State has not created a constitutionally protected liberty interest.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dominique v. Weld“Standing alone, these regulations do little to advance [plaintiffs] cause, as it is well settled that regulations that merely establish reclassification procedures without outlining substantive guidelines do not in themselves convey a protected liberty interest. Lanier, 876 F.2d at 247 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dominique v. Weld
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.