Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 554 F.3d 293 - Pettus v. Morgenthau

Pettus v. Morgenthau’s Empirical Analysis

554 F.3d 293 · 2009

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
1
states following
May 2025
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably Chavis v. Chappius (2010), Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. LY USA, Inc. (2012)

12 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

410200920102020decided

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. § 1915

Relies on Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Warth v. Seldin · Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. Camp · Flast v. Cohen · Bennett v. Spear

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

  1. “In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a civil action or proceeding under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(2) Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that— (B) the action or appeal— (i) is frivolous or malicious. (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “there must be a nexus between the imminent danger a three-strikes prisoner alleges to obtain IFP status and the legal claims asserted in his complaint.”
    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.