651 F. Supp. 2d 1004 - Hess v. Ryan’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Jackson v. Virginia · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Apprendi v. New Jersey · Miller-El v. Cockrell Director Texas Department of Criminal Justice Institutional Division
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“While the petitioner has requested that he be allowed to file a reply to the respondent’s response to his objections, the Court will not permit him to do so because Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2) does not authorize the filing of such a reply, see Cannon Partners, Ltd. v. Cape Cod Biolab Corp., 225 F.R.D. 247, 250 (N.D.Cal.2003); Bradberry v. Schriro, 2009 WL 971298 , at (D.Ariz. April 8, 2009), and because the petitioner’s proposed reply does not add anything significant to the several memoranda the petitioner has already filed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.