Callihan v. Schneider’s Empirical Analysis
178 F.3d 800 · 1999
Citation profile
8 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently November 2022 · most notably Ali Shamaeizadeh v. Joel Cunigan (1999), Rolland v. Primesource Staffing, L.L.C. (2007)
8 federal appellate ·
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Kentucky Eastern District Court)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 28 U.S.C. § 2072 · 28 U.S.C. § 2074 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Heck v. Humphrey · Crawford Fitting Company v. Jt Gibbons Inc Champion International Corporation · Sibbach v. Wilson & Co. · Posadas v. National City Bank · National Educational Support Systems, Inc. v. Autoskill, Inc.
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“concluded that pursuant to the Rules Enabling Act, which provides that “[a]ll laws in conflict with [the federal] rules [of procedure] shall be of no further force or effect after such rules have taken effect,” 28 U.S.C. § 2072 (b), the amended Rule 24 trumped the conflicting provision in § 1915(a)(3).... [The Sixth Circuit thus] held that the party could file, within thirty days of service of the district court’s order denying IFP status on appeal, a motion with this court for leave to proceed IFP on appeal in accordance with the procedures set forth in Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(5).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Callihan's appeal is nevertheless frivolous and the district court did not err in denying Callihan leave to proceed in forma pauperis. As Callihan is apparently facing state criminal charges, under Heck, Callihan's civil rights action must be dismissed without prejudice until the state proceedings have resulted in a not guilty verdict, or any conviction has been overturned on appeal or questioned in a federal habeas corpus petition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A party may file a motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis in the court of appeals within 30 days after service of the notice prescribed in Rule 24(a)(4). The motion must include a copy of the affidavit filed in the district court and the district court’s statement of reasons for its action. If no affidavit was filed in the district court, the party must include the affidavit prescribed by Rule 24(a)(1).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Owens v.Keeling
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.