In Re Wilton Chatman-Bey’s Empirical Analysis
718 F.2d 484 · 1983
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently June 2008 · most notably Chatman-Bey v. Thornburgh (1988), Steven Guerra v. Edwin Meese, III (1986)
19 federal appellate · 4 district ·
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. § 1361 · 28 U.S.C. § 1404 · 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Wolff v. McDonnell · Preiser v. Rodriguez · Allied Chemical Corporation v. Daiflon Inc · Gleason v. United States · Starnes v. McGuire
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Initially, we note that venue is proper in this circuit. Chatman-Bey is challenging the FBP’s computation of his parole eligibility date. In the district court, he requested alternative remedies: federal habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 , and mandamus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1361 . While this court has not decided whether habeas is available to a prisoner alleging an unlawful denial of parole consideration, we have ruled that an alleged improper denial of a parole hearing can be challenged by a petition for a writ of mandamus. See Goode v. Markley, 603 F.2d 973 , 975 & n. 4 (D.C.Cir.1979), cer t. denied 444 U.S. 1083 , 100 S.Ct. 1039 , 62 L.Ed.2d 768 (1980). As Chatman-Bey requested mandamus relief, it is clear that venue is proper in this forum. See Starnes v. McGuire, 512 F.2d 918, 925 (D.C.Cir.1974) (en banc); Wren v. Carlson, 506 F.2d 131, 133-34 (D.C.Cir.1974) (per curiam); 28 U.S.C. § 1361 , 1391(e).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“gist of petitioners’ allegations is that they are being unlawfully subject to physical restraint by reason of the Parole Board’s failure to comply with the statute”). 89 . "For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Chatman-Bey is attacking the FBP’s method of computing parole eligibility for prisoners serving consecutive federal and District of Columbia sentences. He raises a purely legal issue, which requires no trial court factfinding. 718 F.2d at 488 .”
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.