Sanchez v. Vild’s Empirical Analysis
891 F.2d 240 · 1989
Citation profile
86 federal appellate · 16 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 232 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably Jackson v. McIntosh (1996), Maisano III v. United States (1990)
86 federal appellate · 16 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
Relies on Estelle v. Gamble · Fu-Kong Tzung Jean Tzung v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, and Does 1 Through 100, Inclusive · Hunt v. Dental Department · Shapley v. Nevada Board of State Prison Commissioners
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 232 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Summary judgment is appropriate if the moving party presents evidence that shows that no genuine issue of material fact exists and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Once the moving party has met this initial burden, the nonmoving party has the subsequent burden of presenting significant probative evidence tending to support its claim that material, triable issues of fact remain.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Prisoners can establish an eighth amendment violation with respect to medical care if they can prove there has been deliberate indifference to their serious medical needs.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] difference of opinion does not amount to a deliberate indifference.”
6 later decisions 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.