Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 88 Wash. 2d 167 - Bresolin v. Morris

88 Wash. 2d 167 - Bresolin v. Morris’s Empirical Analysis

1977

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
3
states following
November 2021
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 4 district · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently November 2021 · most notably Hoptowit v. Ray (1982), 437 F. Supp. 269 - Laaman v. Helgemoe (1977)

3 federal appellate · 4 district · 18 state decisions

120197719801990200020102020decided

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. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Estelle v. Gamble · Procunier v. Martinez · Robinson v. State of California · Baxstrom v. Herold · Lee v. Washington

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

  1. ““The director of institutions shall provide for the establishment of programs and procedures for convicted persons at the state penitentiary, which are designed to be corrective, rehabilitative and reformative of the undesirable behavior problems of such persons, as distinguished from programs and procedures essentially penal in nature.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “the director of institutions shall provide for the establishment of programs and procedures . . . which are designed to be corrective, rehabilitative and reformative . . .”. The court in Bresolin v. Morris, 88 Wn.2d 167, 171 , 558 P.2d 1350 (1977), in construing that statute observed: "But to say that the government has an interest in rehabilitation and that this is a legitimate institutional goal is one thing. To say that a prisoner has an enforceable right to such rehabilitation is another.”
    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.