Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1 F.3d 885 - Jackson v. Vasquez

Jackson v. Vasquez’s Empirical Analysis

1 F.3d 885 · 1993

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
June 2022
most recently cited

13 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2022 · most notably McFarland v. Scott (1994), Does Thru XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corporation (2000)

13 federal appellate ·

1401993200020102020decided

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 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1651

Relies on Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay · Catlin v. United States · Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. v. Mayacamas Corp.

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

  1. “is not a grant of plenary power to the federal courts. Rather, it is designed to aid the courts in the exercise of their jurisdiction.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Finally, the transportation order will evade effective review on appeal of the decision on Jackson’s petition for habeas corpus. Regardless of the district court’s disposition of the habeas petition, the Warden will not be able to show, on appeal from the final decision, that he was unfairly prejudiced in the habeas proceedings as a result of his compliance.”
    1 later decision 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.