Appleby v. Meachum’s Empirical Analysis
696 F.2d 145 · 1983
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently January 2020 · most notably Miller v. Simmons (1987), Henry v. City of Detroit Manpower Department (1985)
21 federal appellate · 1 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 18 U.S.C. § 3006A (Criminal Justice Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay · Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Risjord · Mercantile National Bank at Dallas v. C H Langdeau Republic National Bank of Dallas · Bradshaw v. Zoological Society of San Diego
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“enmeshed in the factual and legal issues comprising the plaintiff's cause of action.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Robbins v. Maggio · Holt v. Ford“We do not think that a denial of appointed counsel at the outset necessarily 'conclusively determine[s] the disputed question ....' [Coopers,] 437 U.S. at 468, 98 S.Ct. [2454] at 2457. We would expect the district court to leave the order 'subject to revision,' id. 437 U.S. at 469, 98 S.Ct. at 2458, as, for example, where a possibly meritorious case appears to be developing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Robbins v. Maggio“... we are unpersuaded by arguments to the effect that pro se plaintiffs are such a frail class of litigants that denial of appointed counsel at the outset effectively terminates the suit ....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Robbins v. Maggio
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.