Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 21 F. Supp. 2d 1083 - Souch v. Harkins

21 F. Supp. 2d 1083 - Souch v. Harkins’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
June 2001
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Coleman v. Thompson · Murray v. Carrier · Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Sawyer v. Whitley · Calderon v. United States District Court

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

  1. “[T]he state petition may have constituted a 'properly filed application' for tolling purposes even if the superior court had dismissed it solely on the ground of procedural default. The majority of courts analyzing the meaning of 'properly filed application' have interpreted the phrase to encompass all applications submitted in compliance with basic state filing requirements, such as the rules governing the time and place of filing.”
    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.