Jacklovich v. Simmons’s Empirical Analysis
392 F.3d 420 · 2004
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 16 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 53 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2024 · most notably Beard v. Banks (2006), Grynberg v. Total S.A. (2008)
18 federal appellate · 16 district · 1 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 United States v. Diebold, Inc. · Turner v. Safley · Procunier v. Martinez · Pell v. Procunier · Thornburgh v. Abbott
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.
“We hold that publishers are entitled to notice and an opportunity to be heard when their publications are disapproved for receipt by inmate subscribers.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[The] publisher's rights must not be dependent on notifying the inmate[,] who in all likelihood will never see the publication....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Kansas Administrative Regulation § 44-12 — 601(g)(1) provides that “[a]ll books, newspapers, and periodicals shall be purchased through special purchase orders.” This regulation essentially requires that all publications be purchased by inmates through their facility, bank accounts, thus prohibiting the receipt of all gift publications. Inmates are allowed only a facility bank account; all of an inmate’s funds must be deposited therein and transactions involving any other financial account are only permitted by written permission. Any person can mail a money order, certified check or cashier’s check to an inmate account. The regulation barring subscriptions to publications had an effective date of April 17, 1998, but it was not enforced initially; a May 3, 1999, memo gave notice that the policy would be enforced on June 23, 2000, allowing a one-year grandfathering period for inmates to receive newspaper and magazine subscriptions not purchased through a facility bank account. Another one-year grandfathering period was allowed for Level II and III inmates until March 2, 2002, for one gift publication of the inmate’s choice and for only one year, regardless of the amount of time remaining on the subscription. In addition to the ban on publications not purchased through facility bank accounts, KDOC Internal Management Policy and Procedure (“IMPP”) 11-101 limits the amount of an inmate’s outgoing funds to $30.00 per month. 3 Inmates assigned to Intake Level and Level I may not us”
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.