Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 924 F.2d 138 - Stewart v. McManus

Stewart v. McManus’s Empirical Analysis

924 F.2d 138 · 1991

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
5
states following
August 2008
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions

Relationships

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

Relies on Hewitt v. Helms · Whitley v. Albers · Olim v. Wakinekona · Cuyler v. Adams · Parker v. Corrothers

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

  1. “[although the Compact provides that the sending state has a right to conduct hearings in the receiving state and apply its law in situations when the inmate may be entitled to hearings by the law of its state, the Compact and the contract provide that inmates are to be “treated equally,” and that disciplinary authority shall be exercised by the receiving state.... We are satisfied that neither the statutory nor contractual provisions mandate that [the sending state’s] disciplinary rules and regulations be applied to [the inmate’s] disciplinary proceedings in the [receiving state] penitentiary.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Any hearing or hearings to which an inmate confined pursuant to this Compact may be entitled by the laws of the sending state may be had before the appropriate authorities of the sending state, or of the receiving state, if authorized by the sending state.... In the event such hearing or hearings are had before officials of the receiving state, the governing law shall be that of the sending state.... In any and all proceedings had pursuant to the provisions of this subdivision, the officials of the receiving state shall act solely as agents of the sending state and no final determination shall be made in any matter except by the appropriate officials of the sending states.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the receiving state ... shall have ... power to exercise disciplinary authority over all inmates from sending states.”
    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.