Johnson v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis
347 F.2d 365 · 1965
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably Bradshaw v. Story (1996), Caravalho v. Pugh (1999)
17 federal appellate · 3 district ·
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 United State v. Morgan · Smith v. Crouse · McDonald v. United States · Fisher v. United States · Dombrowski v. Pfister
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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'[t]he exclusive remedy for testing the validity of a judgment and sentence, unless it is inadequate or ineffective.' " Id. (quoting Johnson v. Taylor, 347 F.2d 365 , 366 (10th Cir.1965)). A § 2241 petition is not "an additional, alternative, or supplemental remedy”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Id. (citations omitted). Section 2255 provides a method of determining the validity of a judgment by the court which imposed the sentence, and is”
6 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.