Amaker v. Haponik’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1391 · 28 U.S.C. § 1406 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1985 · 42 U.S.C. § 1997E
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Foman v. Davis · United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Local 610 v. Scott · Cortec Industries, Inc. v. Sum Holding L.P. · Nguyen v. Chater
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]o allow [prisoner-plaintiff] to amend or supplement his complaint at this point would require the defendants to devote substantial additional resources to discovery and trial preparation and significantly delay the resolution of [prisoner-plaintiffs] current claims. Thus, the [prisoner-plaintiffs] motion to amend his complaint is likely to cause undue delay and must be denied for that reason.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.