Wright v. Tackett’s Empirical Analysis
39 F.3d 155 · 1994
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently October 2019 · most notably Garry v. Geils (1996), Simpson v. Rowan (1995)
26 federal appellate · 1 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman · Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co. · Pickens v. Lockheed Corp. · Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. · GASH Associates v. Village of Rosemont
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] litigant may not attempt to circumvent the effect of Rooker-Feldman and seek a reversal of a state court judgment simply by casting the complaint in the form of a civil rights action.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In essence, Wright asked the federal district court to review the state court's denial of his requests to intervene in the foreclosure actions.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Engaging in impermissible appellate review may occur when a district court is asked to entertain a claim that was not even argued in the state court but is “inextricably intertwined” with the state court judgment.... There is, unfortunately, no bright line that separates a federal claim that is “inextricably intertwined” with a state court judgment from a claim that is not so intertwined. The crucial point is whether “the district court is in essence being called upon to review the state-court decision.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Garry v. Geils
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.