Harbison v. Little’s Empirical Analysis
571 F.3d 531 · 2009
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Baze v. Rees · Harbison v. Bell · Clark County v. Vacation Village, Inc. · Emmett v. Johnson · State v. Harbison
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Chief Justice Roberts's plurality opinion is controlling.”); Clemons v. Crawford, 585 F.3d 1119 , 1125-26 (8th Cir.2009) (analyzing the plurality opinion as the Court’s holding); Emmett v. Johnson, 532 F.3d 291 , 298-99 (4th Cir.2008) (same); but see Cooey v. Strickland, 610 F.Supp.2d 853 , 919 (S.D.Ohio 2009) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jackson v. Danberg
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.