Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 112 F.3d 818 - Carson v. Johnson

Carson v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

112 F.3d 818 · 1997

Citation profile

144
cited by 144 later decisions
6
states following
August 2023
most recently cited

47 federal appellate · 2 district · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 144 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably Abdul-Akbar v. McKelvie (2001), In Re Detention of Turay (1999)

47 federal appellate · 2 district · 14 state decisions

6501997200020102020decided

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 City of Cleburne Texas v. Cleburne Living Center · Sandin v. Conner · Griffin v. People of the State of Illinois · Schlup v. Delo · Boddie v. Connecticut

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

  1. “[n]either prisoners nor indigents constitute a suspect class.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[1]n no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a civil action or proceeding under this section [proceedings in forma pauperis] if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[i]t can hardly be doubted that deterring frivolous and malicious lawsuits, and thereby preserving scarce judicial resources, is a legitimate state interest.”
    3 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.