Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 275 F.3d 1032 - Parker v. State Board of Pardons

Parker v. State Board of Pardons’s Empirical Analysis

275 F.3d 1032 · 2001

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
March 2019
most recently cited

5 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Relies on Barefoot v. Estelle · Ohio Adult Parole Authority v. Woodard · Zardui-Quintana v. Richard · Gilreath v. State Board of Pardons & Paroles

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

  1. “(a) there is a substantial likelihood of success on the merits; (b) the TRO or preliminary injunction is necessary to prevent irreparable injury; (c) the threatened injury outweighs the harm that the TRO or preliminary injunction would cause to the non-movant; and (d) the TRO or preliminary injunction would not be averse to the public interest.”
    2 later decisions 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.