Case Citator › Daniels v. Williams

Daniels v. Williams

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Limited by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
474 U.S. 327
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
2,273 of 2,273
Citing cases (total)
7,651
Treatment dates
2015
Limited by some courts
At least one reviewed court has limited this case’s holding to narrower facts or a narrower rule. No reviewed court has overruled it. Screening is complete: all 2273 flagged citations have been read. Daniels v. Williams remains controlling, subject to the limit listed below.
More on how this was screened

The Northern District of Florida held that Daniels did not excuse a negligent failure to give notice after an intentional deprivation of property.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

7,651 later cases cite Daniels v. Williams; 2,273 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Daniels v. Williams?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Limited

  • Daniels did not excuse negligent failure to give notice when the underlying deprivation was intentional.

    Prison Legal News v. Jones · Northern District of Florida · filed

    In contrast, the Third Circuit in Sourbeer v. Robinson limited Daniels to the substantive deprivation. ... This Court believes that the Third Circuit has the better-reasoned opinion. ... Just because past failures were the product of negligent conduct does not absolve the FDOC of its constitutional obligation to provide notice going forward.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Daniels v. Williams and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace