Varallo v. Ohio’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
March 1973
most recently cited
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Fay v. Noia · Jones v. Cunningham · Smith v. Hooey · Peyton v. Rowe · Smith v. Crouse
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.
“We do not hold, therefore, that this Court lacks all potential jurisdiction of these petitions; but we are of opinion that for this Court to entertain such applications is both a waste of the Court's time and an exercise in futility on the part of the petitioners. Accordingly, the Court will henceforth decline to entertain habeas petitions by prisoners who seek to attack detainers filed by authorities resident in foreign jurisdictions unless it is shown that application for relief has been made to the federal district court sitting in the demanding state.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Reed v. Henderson
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.