Neville v. Cavanagh’s Empirical Analysis
611 F.2d 673 · 1979
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently August 2015 · most notably United States Hoover v. Franzen (1982), Johnny Dickerson v. State of Louisiana (1987)
10 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 Abney v. United States · Carafas v. J · Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky · Royall · Barrett v. United States
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In light of the fact that Neville does seek to derail a pending state criminal proceeding, and that he may be acquitted at trial, we believe the district court was correct in denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus at this time. We note that this decision does not bar federal consideration of Neville’s claim. Rather, it merely delays such consideration until “a time when federal jurisdiction will not seriously disrupt state judicial processes. ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Reed v. Clark“It would be extraordinarily useful in the instant case for a federal court to promptly consider and construe this interstate detainer compact because this compact attempts to provide a nationally uniform method of transferring federal prisoners to state courts. Such an objective can be realized only by uniform interpretation of the compact.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Reed v. Clark
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.