Wright v. Cuyler’s Empirical Analysis
624 F.2d 455 · 1980
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently May 2022 · most notably Graham v. Broglin (1991), Georgevich v. Strauss (1985)
13 federal appellate · 3 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 Haines v. Kerner · Preiser v. Rodriguez · Greenholtz v. Inmates of Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex · WILWORDING Et Al. v. SWENSON, WARDEN · Cooper v. Pate
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Wright’s demand for fair application of the furlough eligibility criteria, as distinct from his demand for admission to the program, relates to the manner by which the prison authorities reach their decision and not the outcome of their decision. Thus, this particular claim of Wright’s unmistakably goes not to the fact or duration of confinement but rather to the fairness of the decision making process. Although impartial application of the furlough criteria to Wright might increase his chance to gain admission to the furlough program, injunctive relief ordering impartial application would not intrude upon or divest the prison adminis tration of its ultimate discretion to grant or deny Wright’s admission to the program. The Preiser rule is therefore in any event inapplicable.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Preiser involved a program that would enable the prisoner to be granted early parole and to be released from prison before the end of his sentence,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“then his sole federal remedy is a writ of habeas corpus, 28 U.S.C. §§ 2254, 2255, but if the prisoner is challenging only”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Tedford v. Hepting
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.