Mitchell v. Rees’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
7 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently September 2020
7 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.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2243 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 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 Batson v. Kentucky · Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp. · Gonzalez v. Crosby · Standard Oil Co of California v. United States · Salmi v. Secretary of Health & Human Services
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(b) Grounds for Relief from a Final Judgment [or] Order.... On motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party ... from a final judgment [or] order ... for the following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; ... or (6) any other reason that justifies relief.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Willis v. Jones“Before the district court, Mitchell argued that the district court’s equitable powers over its own judgment derived from Article III of the Constitution and 28 U.S.C. § 2243 provided bases separate from Rule 60(b) for providing relief. Mitchell does not raise these arguments on appeal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mitchell v. Rees
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.