Coakley v. Murphy’s Empirical Analysis
884 F.2d 1218 · 1989
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably Dorfmont v. Brown (1990), Bulger v. United States Bureau of Prisons (1995)
20 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 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 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Wolff v. McDonnell · Meachum v. Fano · Olim v. Wakinekona · Massachusetts Board of Retirement v. Murgia
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“all that is constitutionally required of the [DOC's] program is that it be rationally related to a legitimate state objective.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A due process claim is cognizable only if there is a recognized liberty or property interest at stake.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“a failure to allege a restriction on the authorities' right to transfer.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Fay v. J Quinlan
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.