Pozo v. McCaughtry’s Empirical Analysis
286 F.3d 1022 · 2002
Citation profile
57 federal appellate · 25 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 206 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2024 · most notably Woodford v. Ngo (2006), Spruill v. Gillis (2004)
57 federal appellate · 25 district · 5 state decisions
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. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1997E
Relies on Coleman v. Thompson · Engle v. Isaac · Ake v. Oklahoma · William O'sullivan v. Darren Boerckel · V. C O Churner
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 206 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To exhaust remedies, a prisoner must file complaints and appeals in the place, and at the time, the prison's administrative rules require.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“all steps that the agency holds out, and do[] so properly (so that the agency addresses the issues on the merits).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“`exhaust' state remedies by spurning them.”
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.