Stiltner v. Rhay’s Empirical Analysis
322 F.2d 314 · 1963
Citation profile
71 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 112 later decisions — most recently July 2010 · most notably Sostre v. McGinnis (1971), Franklin v. Murphy (1984)
71 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 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
Relies on Screws v. United States · United States v. Muniz · Hoffman v. Halden · Michael Cohen v. Russell K. Norris · Mark O. Hatfield, Governor of the State of Oregon v. Paul R. Bailleaux
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 112 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The district court’s decision whether to grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (a) should turn solely on the economic status of the petitioner. In those cases where leave is granted, the court should consider the separate question, under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (d), whether the complaint should be dismissed as “frivolous or malicious”.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“`Reasonable access to the courts is * * * a right * * * guaranteed as against state action by the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment.' This includes, specifically, `right of access by state prisoners of state courts;' and a deprivation of this right is therefore actionable under the Civil Rights Act. Hatfield v. Bailleaux, 290 F.2d 632 , 636 (9th Cir. 1961). See also Spires v. Bottorff, 317 F.2d 273 , 274 (7th Cir. 1963); Note, Constitutional Rights of Prisoners: The Developing Law, 110 U.Pa.L.Rev. 985, 987-92 (1962). Indeed, reasonable access to the courts is basic to all other rights protected by the Act, for it is essential to their enforcement.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Smartt v. Avery“There is no federally protected right of a state prisoner not to work while imprisoned after conviction, even though that conviction is being appealed.”
1 later decision 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.