In re Miller’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1915
Relies on George L. HARRIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WALGREEN’S DISTRIBUTION CENTER, Defendant-Appellee · John T. SPANOS, Appellant, v. PENN CENTRAL TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, Appellee · 313 F. Supp. 1271 - Petete v. Consolidated Freightways · 294 F. Supp. 34 - Green v. Cotton Concentration Company · 315 F. Supp. 523 - Edmonds v. EI duPONT deNEMOURS & COMPANY
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“he contacted three lawyers, as well as Legal Aid and the Bar Association, all to no avail”) with Spanos v. Penn Cent. Transp. Co., 470 F.2d 806 , 808 (3d Cir.1972) (per cu-riam) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“inappropriate, since there has been no showing that such a suit would be other than frivolous”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.