Jerry v. Francisco’s Empirical Analysis
632 F.2d 252 · 1980
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably Ulmer v. Chancellor (1982), Weaver v. Wilcox (1981)
18 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 state decisions
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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (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 Haines v. Kerner · Cruz v. Beto · Preiser v. Newkirk · Hampton v. Holmesburg Prison Officials · Stone v. Morris
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In making his determination the district judge should take into account the costs and inconvenience of transporting a prisoner from his place of incarceration to the courtroom, any potential danger or security risk which the presence of a particular inmate would pose to the court, the substantiality of the matter at issue, the need for an early determination of the matter, the possibility of delaying trial until the prisoner is released, the probability of success on the merits, the integrity of the correctional system, and the interests of the inmate in presenting his testimony in person rather than by deposition.” 12”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““... the liability of supervisory personnel under section 1983 turns on whether the prisoner complains about a sporadic incident, which may be beyond the control of a supervisor, or about general conditions and policies properly within the supervisory purview of the officer in charge of the prison.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“the magistrate and by adoption, the district court did not even exercise its discretion, even though the plaintiff, Jerry, had made two prior motions that witnesses be subpoenaed ... [i]t was clearly (reversible) error to fail to act on the motion and exercise the discretion.”
1 later decision 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.