Rhodes v. Robinson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 federal appellate · 2 district ·

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

1. “a supplemental complaint 'completely super[s]edes any earlier complaint, rendering the original complaint non-existent and, thus, its filing date irrelevant.'”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Jackson v. Fong · May v. Segovia

2. “We have held that “a prisoner does not comply with [the exhaustion] requirement by exhausting available remedies during the course of the litigation.” If, however, a plaintiff files an amended complaint adding new claims based on conduct that occurred after the filing of the initial complaint, the plaintiff need only show that the new claims were exhausted before tendering the amended complaint to the clerk for filing.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Cano v. Taylor

3. “must be read and applied in the larger context of the pleading framework established by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. As a general rule, when a plaintiff files an amended complaint, [t]he amended complaint supercedes the original, the latter being treated thereafter as non-existent. Nothing in the PLRA’s exhaustion requirement creates an exception to this basic premise of our jurisprudence on pleadings.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Cano v. Taylor