Hebner v. McGrath’s Empirical Analysis
543 F.3d 1133 · 2008
Citation profile
6 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently March 2021
6 federal appellate ·
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 28 U.S.C. § 2242 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 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) · 45 U.S.C. § 51 (Federal Employers' Liability Act)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Woodford v. Visciotti · Mayle v. Felix · Tiller v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad · Pierce v. Multnomah County
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] new claim in an amended petition relates back to avoid a limitations bar, when the limitations period has run in the meantime, only when it arises from the same core of operative facts as a claim contained in the original petition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ford v. Gonzalez“original claim related to the evidence admitted at trial, while his later claim was directed at the jury instructions given by the trial court”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Davis v. Johnson
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.