Ledher v. Thornburgh’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2242 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky · Ex parte Endo · Steven Guerra v. Edwin Meese, III · Sanders v. Bennett
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the petitioner. 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 . The warden of the federal penal facility is generally the prisoner's custodian for the purposes of a habeas corpus action. See Ex parte Endo, 323 U.S. 283, 306 , 65 S.Ct. 208, 220 , 89 L.Ed. 243 (1944) (writ is directed to prisoner's”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Connally v. Reno“This is because the custodian is the person having day-to-day control over the prisoner.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Connally v. Reno“name ... the person who has custody over”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Connally v. Reno
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.