Chavis v. Chappius’s Empirical Analysis
618 F.3d 162 · 2010
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Adepegba v. Hammons · Webster v. Fall · McCarthy v. Dun & Bradstreet Corp. · Harris v. Mills · Sims v. Blot
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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]lthough the feared physical injury must be 'serious,' 'we should not make an overly detailed inquiry into whether the allegations qualify for the exception,' because § 1915(g)'concerns only a threshold procedural question'....”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“cannot invent factual allegations that [the plaintiff] has not pled.”
3 later decisions 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.