Johnson ex rel. Johnson v. Thompson’s Empirical Analysis
971 F.2d 1487 · 1992
Citation profile
46 federal appellate · 14 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 108 later decisions — most recently February 2024 · most notably Gross v. Burggraf Construction Co. (1995), Sprague v. Thorn Americas, Inc. (1997)
46 federal appellate · 14 district · 4 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 Joshua Deshaney, a Minor, by His Guardian Ad Litem, and Melody Deshaney,s v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, et al. · Youngberg v. Romeo Ex Rel. Romeo · Torres v. Oakland Scavenger Co. · Green v. Mansour · Cruzan Ex Rel. Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health
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 108 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“resulted from the handicap and from the handicap alone,”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]here the handicapping condition is related to the condition(s) being treated, it will rarely, if ever, be possible to say ... that a particular decision was 'discriminatory'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Helen L., Beverly D., Florence H., Ilene F., Idell S., and American Disabled for Attendant Programs Today ("a.d.a.p.t."), Idell S. v. Albert L. Didario, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Superintendent of Norristown State Hospital, and Karen F. Snider, in Her Capacity as Secretary, Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare, Karen F. Snider · Fitzgerald v. Corrections Corp. of America“[o]rdinarily, however, if a person were not so handicapped, he or she would not need the medical treatment and thus would not `otherwise qualify' for the treatment”
3 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.