Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 477 FSUPP 758 - Green v. Camper

Green v. Camper’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
February 1996
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 6 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently February 1996 · most notably Procup v. Strickland (1986), In re Green (1981)

8 federal appellate · 6 district ·

280197919801990decided

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 18 U.S.C. § 1503 · 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Thomas v. United States · Duhart v. Carlson · Hardwick v. Brinson · 428 F. Supp. 732 - Green v. Wyrick · 450 F. Supp. 1049 - Boston v. Stanton

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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[U]nless the Courts of this Nation are to be deemed to be powerless to stop such a flagrant abuse of the judicial process, one man will be able to preempt so much judicial time at the trial and appellate levels as to thwart the very ability of the judicial system to carry out its necessary judicial function of properly processing its criminal and civil dockets of cases filed by other litigants who may have meritorious matters.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “First, despite the experience of having filed “hundreds” of lawsuits, petitioner consistently and deliberately has failed to follow the proper procedures and rules for filing actions in this Court. Contrary to local rules requiring inmates to submit petitions on court-approved and court-provided forms, and Rule 8(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, requiring a short and plain statement of the claim, the petitioner continues to submit voluminous pro se pleadings containing conclu-sory statements and long-winded recitations of irrelevant facts and allegations”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Petitioner is of the apparent mind that by flooding the Court with litigation and rendering it unable to administer its docket because of the sheer volume of such frivolous and malicious filings he will cause the Court to order his release from custody.”
    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.