In Re W. J. Estelle, Jr., Director, Texas Department of Corrections’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Mayflower Development Corp. v. Town of Dennis (1981), 458 F. Supp. 302 - Adams v. Mathis (1978)
2 federal appellate · 1 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 J. I. Case Co. v. Borak · Will v. United States · Roche v. Evaporated Milk Ass'n · Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. Holland · Schlagenhauf v. Holder
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Upon timely application anyone may be permitted to intervene in an action: (1) when a statute of the United States confers a conditional right to intervene; or (2) when an applicant’s claim or defense and the main action have a question of law or fact in common. When a party to an action relies for ground of claim or defense upon any statute or executive order administered by a federal or state governmental officer or agency or upon any regulation, order, requirement, or agreement issued or made pursuant to the statute or executive order, the officer or agency upon timely application may be permitted to intervene in the action. In exercising its discretion the court shall consider whether the intervention will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“This provision [Rule 24(b)(2)] plainly dispenses with any requirement that the intervenor shall have a direct personal or pecuniary interest in the subject of the litigation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Newby“It is well settled that `[a]n order allowing intervention is interlocutory and may not be appealed immediately.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Newby
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.