Rodriguez v. Cook’s Empirical Analysis
169 F.3d 1176 · 1999
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 5 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably Max Lopez Jr v. Ga Smith Larry Loo a Acevedo Patterson 4a-2r (2000), Abdul-Akbar v. McKelvie (2001)
24 federal appellate · 5 district · 7 state decisions
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. § 1913 · 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Buckley v. Valeo · City of Cleburne Texas v. Cleburne Living Center · Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Griffin v. People of the State of Illinois · Lewis Director Arizona Department of Corrections v. Casey
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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“® Proceeding in forma pauperis in a civil case is a privilege, not a right, fundamental or otherwise. 3 e The "three-strike rule" does not prohibit an inmate from filing suit; it merely prohibits an inmate from doing so without paying the filing fee which all civil plaintiffs must pay. e The right of access to the courts does not guarantee anyone a right of access in all cireumstances. ® Congress is no more compelled to guarantee free access to federal courts than it is to provide unlimited access to them; thus, imposition of a modest filing fee on prisoners is reasonable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“) and provides that: In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal ... under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more 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. This subdivision is commonly known as the”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[b]udgetary concerns are a legitimate governmental interest and curbing the costs of defending against frivolous litigation is rationally related to maintaining the budget.”
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.