Irving v. Thigpen’s Empirical Analysis
732 F.2d 1215 · 1984
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2015 · most notably Board of Pardons v. Allen (1987), Spears v. Ol McCotter (1985)
18 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 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 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Baker v. McCollan · Greenholtz v. Inmates of Nebraska Penal and Correctional Complex · Connecticut Board of Pardons v. Dumschat · Griffin v. United States · United States v. Security Industrial Bank
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“However, since the court could not determine the merits of Irving's complaint prior to service without concluding that the complaint was”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) Every prisoner ... whose record of conduct shows that such prisoner has observed the rules of the penitentiary, and who has served not less than one-fourth (lh) of the total of such term or terms for which such prisoner was sentenced, or, if sentenced to serve a term or terms of thirty (30) years or more, or, if sentenced for the term of the natural life of such prisoner, has served not less than ten (10) years of such life sentence, may be released on parole ...””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) The Supreme Court, a Justice thereof, a circuit judge, or a district court shall entertain an application for a writ of habeas corpus in behalf of a person in custody pursuant to judgment of a State court only on the ground that he is in custody in violation of the Constitution or laws or treaties of the United States.”
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.