Grayson v. Dunn’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 158 · 28 U.S.C. § 1746 · 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Budinich v. Becton Dickinson & Co. · Gillespie v. United States Steel Corp. · Griffith v. United States · Baze v. Rees
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“). 100 . Indeed, nothing in Brooks precludes, on law-of-the-case grounds or as precedent, a contrary resolution of the same issues on the basis of a different evidentiary record. A District Court could abuse its discretion by denying a stay if another party were to bring a stay motion with a proffer that tends to persuasively show that the switch to midazolam constituted a substantial change in protocol and that a proposed one-drug protocol is an adequate substitute, 101 . "Defendants’ motion concerns Smith and four other plaintiffs (Charles Lee Burton, Robert Bryant Melson, Geoffrey Todd West, and Torrey Twane McNabb), all of whom were consolidated into the Midazolam Litigation on April 28, 2016. This Memorandum Opinion and Order addresses Defendants’ motion only in relation to Smith's complaint.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The fact that Smith does not propose that the ADOC be required to return to its use of sodium thiopental or pentobar-bital as the first drug administered in a three-drug protocol is significant because it reveals the true nature of his Eighth Amendment claim: Smith is challenging the three-drug, lethal-injection execution protocol, regardless of the first drug administered, as being unconstitutional. In -effect, he is .challenging the last two drugs, not the first: not sodium thiopental, not pentobarbital, not midazolam.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“challenge to all three-drug protocols that employ a paralytic as the second drug and potassium chloride as the third drug. In his response, Smith does not address Defendants’ contention that his claim, in actuality, is a challenge against the use of any three-drug execution protocol. And this claim accrued long ago.”
2 later decisions 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.