Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 347 F.3d 214 - Kramer v. Olson

Kramer v. Olson’s Empirical Analysis

347 F.3d 214 · 2003

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
April 2017
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Relies on Bailey v. United States · Richardson v. United States · Rutledge v. United States · Jones v. United States · Fischer v. United States

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

  1. “An application for a writ of habeas corpus in behalf of a prisoner who is authorized to apply for relief by motion pursuant to this section, shall not be entertained if it appears that the applicant has failed to apply for relief, by motion, to the court which sentenced him, or that such court has denied him relief, unless it also appears that the remedy by motion is inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[A] Richardson claim is not the sort that will permit passage through the narrow opening of § 2255’s savings clause,”); Sawyer v. Holder, 326 F.3d 1363, 1366 (11th Cir. 2003) (”
    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.