486 F. Supp. 2d 421 - Ramirez v. Pugh’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
3
cited by 3 later decisions
October 2013
most recently cited
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 530C
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Turner v. Safley · Procunier v. Martinez · O'Lone v. Estate of Shabazz · 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he Ensign Amendment ... was originally enacted as part of the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997. See Pub.L. No. 104-208, § 614 , 110 Stat. 3009 (1996). The amendment ... has been reenacted in each subsequent appropriations act and is now codified at 28 U.S.C. § 530C(b)(6)[.]” Ramirez v. Pugh, 486 F.Supp.2d 421, 424 (M.D.Pa.2007) (footnote omitted), appeal dismissed, 273 Fed.Appx. 159 (3d Cir.2008). 3 . The definitions of the terms”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ballard v. Holinka
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.