Case Citator › Hoptowit v. Ray

Hoptowit v. Ray

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

Declined by some courts
Court
Ninth Circuit
Citation
682 F.2d 1237
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
475 of 475
Citing cases (total)
1,224
Treatment dates
1992
Declined by some courts
At least one reviewed court has declined to follow this case. No reviewed court has overruled it. Hoptowit v. Ray was declined in part by the Third Circuit in Young v. Quinlan. That court used a combined view of prison conditions to assess an Eighth Amendment claim and expressly called Hoptowit's narrower approach contrary.
More on how this was screened

The confirmed treatment is listed below. All 475 flagged citations have been read.

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.

1,224 later cases cite Hoptowit v. Ray; 475 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 Hoptowit v. Ray?

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

Declined to follow

  • The Third Circuit rejected Hoptowit's restriction of a combined conditions analysis to particular prison conditions when it assessed the seriousness of an Eighth Amendment claim.

    Young v. Quinlan · Third Circuit · filed

    In determining whether a deprivation was sufficiently serious, a court must look at the totality of the conditions affecting an inmate. The Supreme Court has indicated that conditions of confinement, "alone, or in combination, may deprive inmates of the minimal civilized measure of life's necessities." Rhodes, 452 U.S. at 347, 101 S.Ct. at 2499 (emphasis added); See Union County Jail Inmates v. DiBuono, 713 F.2d 984 (3d Cir.1983), cert. denied, 465 U.S. 1102, 104 S.Ct. 1600, 80 L.Ed.2d 130 (1984) ("The totality of circumstances relevant to this inquiry comprises all those circumstances that bear on the nature of the [food, clothing, shelter, sanitation, medical care, or protection] afforded to sentenced inmates."); but see contra Hoptowit v. Ray, 682 F.2d 1237, 1247 (9th Cir.1982) (restricting the totality of circumstances approach to specific conditions of confinement). In Young's case, we find that the totality of the conditions of his imprisonment, namely the protection and sanitation afforded to him, are sufficiently serious to satisfy the objective component of the Wilson Eighth Amendment analysis
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Hoptowit v. Ray 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