Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 975 F.2d 727 - Maldonado v. Josey

Maldonado v. Josey’s Empirical Analysis

975 F.2d 727 · 1992

Citation profile

118
cited by 118 later decisions
6
states following
August 2017
most recently cited

56 federal appellate · 22 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 118 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably Doe v. Taylor Independent School District (1994), Leffall v. Dallas Independent School District (1994)

56 federal appellate · 22 district · 7 state decisions

740199220002010decided

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. § 1291 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Estelle v. Gamble · Joshua Deshaney, a Minor, by His Guardian Ad Litem, and Melody Deshaney,s v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, et al. · Siegert v. Gilley · Ingraham v. Wright

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

  1. “individuals depend[ent] completely on the state to satisfy their basic human needs.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “compulsory attendance laws do not create an affirmative constitutional duty to protect students from the private actions of third parties while they attend school.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the school defendants did not restrict D.R.'s freedom to the extent that she was prevented from meeting her basic needs. Thus, the school defendants' authority over D.R. during the school day cannot be said to create the type of physical custody necessary to bring it within the special relationship noted in DeShaney, particularly when their channels for outside communication were not totally closed.”
    2 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.