Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 89 F.3d 538 - Prater v. Dahm

Prater v. Dahm’s Empirical Analysis

89 F.3d 538 · 1996

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
1
states following
April 2025
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Liebe v. Norton (1998), Jackson v. Everett (1998)

17 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

1701996200020102020decided

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 · Anderson v. Creighton · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Farmer v. Brennan · Missouri v. Continential Insurance Cos.

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

  1. “Qualified immunity shields government actors from liability in civil lawsuits when “them conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” As our cases further establish, however, the question of qualified immunity requires more than a determination that a particular right is “clearly established” in the abstract. Instead, we must examine whether reasonable officials could have believed their actions violated clearly established law, given the information available to the officials at the time of the attack.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “threats between inmates are common and do not, under all circumstances, serve to impute actual knowledge of a substantial risk of harm.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “contains two components: 1) an objectively serious deprivation; and 2) a subjectively culpable state of mind”
    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.