Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 650 F.2d 647 - Mitchum v. Purvis

Mitchum v. Purvis’s Empirical Analysis

650 F.2d 647 · 1981

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
May 2006
most recently cited

13 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently May 2006 · most notably Bonner v. City of Prichard (1981), Ulmer v. Chancellor (1982)

13 federal appellate ·

230198119902000decided

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 Wolff v. McDonnell · White v. Morgan · Ballard v. Spradley · Rudolph v. Locke · D Jacobs v. Hardwick

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

  1. “is founded in the Due Process Clause and assures that no person will be denied the opportunity to present to the judiciary allegations concerning violations of fundamental constitutional rights”); California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited, 404 U.S. 508 , 510, 92 S.Ct. 609 , 612, 30 L.Ed.2d 642 (1972) (right is “indeed but one aspect of the right of petition”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[a]ny concern over the need to transport ... prisoners to court should be considered if and when writs of habeas corpus ad testificandum are sought”
    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.