Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 906 F.2d 835 - McCarthy v. Bronson

McCarthy v. Bronson’s Empirical Analysis

906 F.2d 835 · 1990

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
September 2019
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2019 · most notably McCarthy v. Bronson (1991), McFarland v. Leyh (1995)

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

190199020002010decided

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. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 28 U.S.C. § 753 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Preiser v. Rodriguez · Lanza v. Drexel & Co. · Royal American Managers, Inc. v. IRC Holding Corp. · Lovelace v. Dall · Branch v. Martin

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. “Subsection 636(b)(1)(B) was added in 1976 as part of a broadening of the authority of magistrates. Act of Oct. 21, 1976, Pub.L. 94-577, 90 Stat. 2729. The House Report does not explain the category 'prisoner petitions challenging conditions of confinement' but does refer to 'petitions under section 1983 of Title 42.' H.R.Rep. No. 1609, 94th Cong., 2d Sess. 11, reprinted in 1976 U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News 6162, 6171.... 40 We see no reason why a Magistrate with clear authority to hold hearings and recommend findings as to the unconstitutionality of continuing prison conditions may not perform a similar function as to specific episodes of unconstitutional conduct by prison officials. The phrase 'conditions of confinement' appears not to have been selected as a limitation to preclude episodes of misconduct, but rather as a generalized category covering all grievances occurring during prison confinement.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “of prisoner petitions challenging conditions of confinement.”
    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.