Madrid v. Gomez’s Empirical Analysis
150 F.3d 1030 · 1998
Citation profile
28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
September 2007
most recently cited
13 federal appellate · 3 district ·
Relationships
Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · Wolff v. McDonnell · City of Cleburne Texas v. Cleburne Living Center · Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Blum v. Stenson
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.
“reasonable expectation[s] that work they performed prior to the enactment of the PLRA . . . would be compensated at the pre-PLRA rates . . . . " Id. at 2006 . With respect to work performed after the effective date of the Act, however, the Court concluded that attorneys "were on notice that their hourly rate had been adjusted " and, thus, "any expectation of compensation at pre-PLRA rates was unreasonable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“go one step further and demonstrate that the alleged shortcomings in the . . . legal assistance program hindered his efforts to pursue a legal claim.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“basic notions of fair notice, reasonable reliance, and settled expectations.”
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.