Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 136 F.3d 458 - Patton v. Jefferson Correctional Center

Patton v. Jefferson Correctional Center’s Empirical Analysis

136 F.3d 458 · 1998

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
1
states following
August 2017
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably Snider v. Melindez (1999), Rivera v. Allin (1998)

15 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

290199820002010decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Heck v. Humphrey · Adepegba v. Hammons · Carson v. Johnson · Orellana v. Kyle · Boyd v. Biggers

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

  1. “In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a civil action or proceeding under this section 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.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “litigious prisoners [to] immunize frivolous lawsuits from the 'three strikes' barrier by the simple expedient of pleading unexhausted habeas claims as components of § 1983 suits.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “from the reach of the PLRA's 'three strikes' proviso simply because the cases included unexhausted habeas claims”
    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.