Jimenez v. Wood County’s Empirical Analysis
660 F.3d 841 · 2011
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3401 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on United States v. Olano · Bell v. Wolfish · Puckett v. United States · Johnson v. United States · Procunier v. Martinez
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“requires a party to object to jury instructions in order to preserve a claim of error for appeal.” Jimenez v. Wood County, Tex., 660 F.3d 841 , 844 (5th Cir.2011) (en banc). Rule 51 further provides that”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Where a proper objection is not made, ... our review of a jury instruction challenge is limited to review for plain error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.