Gibbs v. Roman’s Empirical Analysis
116 F.3d 83 · 1997
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 11 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably Mark Tourscher v. Martin Horn Secretary of the Pa Dept of Corrections (1999), Giles v. Kearney (2009)
19 federal appellate · 11 district ·
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 Haines v. Kerner · Denton v. Hernandez · Nami v. Fauver · Markowitz v. Northeast Land Co.
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 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gibbs v. Cross · Malik v. McGinnis“After the threshold issue of imminent danger is resolved ..., the focus of the litigation may generally shift to other issues. Satisfaction of the “imminent danger” element does no more than permit the complainant to proceed with his or her cause of action without pre-payment of the filing fee in full. Once the fee barrier has been overcome, the merits of the cause of action itself are then available for consideration and decision. For example, if the substance of the complaint deals with claims unrelated to the issue of imminent danger ..., once the § 1915(g) threshold has been met, the “imminent danger” issue may be totally irrelevant to the adjudication of the merits of the alleged constitutional violations.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“that the proper focus when examining an inmate's complaint filed pursuant to 1915(g) must be the imminent danger faced by the inmate at the time of the alleged incident, and not at the time the complaint was filed.”
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.