Barry v. Sigler’s Empirical Analysis
373 F.2d 835 · 1967
Citation profile
41 federal appellate · 9 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently March 2004 · most notably United States v. Haldeman (1976), United States v. Tropiano (1969)
41 federal appellate · 9 district · 11 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. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Townsend v. Sain · Fay v. Noia · Giles v. State of Maryland · Prado Oil & Gas Co. v. Federal Power Commission · Bradford v. Commissioner
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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘The section [144] is directed to personal bias, which means an attitude of extrajudicial origin. A mere showing of prior judicial exposure to the present parties or questions will not invoke the section.’ ” (Citing Lyons v. United States (9 Cir. 1963), 325 F. 2d 370, 376 , cert. denied, 377 U.S. 969 , 84 S.Ct. 1650 , 12 L.Ed.2d 738 . Court held affidavits legally insufficient.)”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“`* * * Although relief may ultimately be denied, that the state courts should have the opportunity to decide in the first instance is a course consistent with comity, cf. 28 U.S.C. § 2254, and a full and fair hearing in the state courts would make unnecessary further evidentiary proceedings in the federal courts. See Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293 , 83 S.Ct. 745, 9 L.Ed.2d 770 * * *' Giles v. State of Maryland, Feb. 20, 1967, 386 U.S. 66 , 87 S.Ct. 793, 17 L.Ed.2d 737.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Roach v. Bennett · Tyler v. Swenson“state delay is a result of discrimination against the petitioner,”
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.