Colle v. Brazos County’s Empirical Analysis
981 F.2d 237 · 1993
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 101 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably Baker v. Putnal (1996), Hill v. Dekalb Regional Youth Detention Center (1994)
30 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 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 Conley v. Gibson · Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Anderson v. Creighton · Estelle v. Gamble · Bell v. Wolfish
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 101 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We may not go outside the pleadings. We accept all well-pleaded facts as true and view them in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff. We cannot uphold the dismissal `unless it appears beyond doubt that the Plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] policy statement, ordinance, regulation, or decision that is officially adopted and promulgated by the municipality's lawmaking officers or by an official to whom the lawmakers have delegated policy-making authority.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the ultimate question is whether Brazos County adopted policies creating an obvious risk that pretrial detainees' constitutional rights would be violated”
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.