Rutherford v. McDonough’s Empirical Analysis
466 F.3d 970 · 2006
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Arthur v. King (2007), United States v. Howard (2014)
17 federal appellate · 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.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2244 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1997E
Relies on Nelson v. Campbell Commissioner Alabama Department of Corrections et al. · Hill v. McDonough · Gomez v. United States District Court for Northern District of California a-767 · Ned L. Siegel, Georgette Sosa Douglas v. Theresa Lepore, Charles E. Burton · Evans III v. Bennett a-868
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) whether there is a substantial likelihood of success on the merits; (2) whether the requested action is necessary to prevent irreparable injury; (3) whether the threatened injury outweighs the harm the stay or injunction would inflict upon the non-movant; and (4) whether the requested action would serve the public interest.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[e]ach delay, for its span, is a commutation of a death sentence to one of imprisonment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bowles v. Desantis“[t]he federal courts can and should protect States from dilatory or speculative suits.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cooey v. Strickland
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.