Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 563 F.3d 736 - Kahle v. Leonard

Kahle v. Leonard’s Empirical Analysis

563 F.3d 736 · 2009

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
February 2021
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently February 2021

11 federal appellate · 1 district ·

100200920102020decided

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. § 1291 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988 · 42 U.S.C. § 1997E

Relies on Batson v. Kentucky · Hensley v. Eckerhart · JEB v. Alabama Ex Rel. TB · Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co. · Snyder v. Louisiana

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.

  1. “Courts evaluate Batson challenges under a three-step test. First, the defendant must make a prima facie case that the prosecution’s strike was motivated by race; second, the prosecution must offer a race-neutral reason for the strike; and third, taking into account all the evidence, the trial court must find whether or not the prosecutor was motivated by purposeful discrimination.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) the degree of the opposing parties’ culpability or bad faith, (2) the ability of the opposing parties to satisfy an award of attorneys’ fees, (3) whether an award of attorneys’ fees against the opposing parties could deter other persons acting under similar circumstances, and (4) the relative merits of the parties’ positions. The court may also use other relevant considerations. A district court need not mechanically apply these factors. A district court has broad discretion in determining an appropriate percentage under § 1997e(d)(2).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[n]o Federal civil action may be brought by a prisoner confined in a jail, prison, or other correctional facility, for mental or emotional injury suffered while in custody without a prior showing of physical injury or the commission of a sexual act.”
    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.