Mendoza v. Meisel’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Heck v. Humphrey · Daniels v. Williams · Neitzke v. Williams · City of Cleburne Texas v. Cleburne Living Center · Hudson v. Palmer
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Heck does not bar a § 1983 claim where the plaintiff is unable to challenge his conditions of confinement through a petition for federal habeas corpus.”). 7 . See e.g., Carr v. O’Leary, 167 F.3d 1124 , 1127 (7th Cir.1999); Huang v. Johnson, 251 F.3d 65 , 75 (2d Cir.2001); Nonnette v. Small, 316 F.3d 872 , 874 (9th Cir.2002); Harden v. Pataki, 320 F.3d 1289 , 1298 (11th Cir.2003); and Powers v. Hamilton County Public Defender Comm’n, 501 F.3d 592 , 603 (6th Cir.2007) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Wilson v. Johnson
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.