Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 81 F.3d 717 - Meeks v. McBride

Meeks v. McBride’s Empirical Analysis

81 F.3d 717 · 1996

Citation profile

65
cited by 65 later decisions
5
states following
July 2023
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably Jimmy Walker v. J.T. O'brien, and Joseph W. Finfrock v. Craig A. Hanks (2000), McPherson v. McBride (1999)

14 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

3601996200020102020decided

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

Relies on Wolff v. McDonnell · Superintendent Massachusetts Correctional Institution Walpole v. Hill · Noram Energy Corp. v. United States · Kent v. Bechtel Group, Inc. · Whitford v. Boglino

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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[U]nder Indiana law, state prison inmates have a protected liberty interest in earned good-time credits.... [T]he state may not deprive inmates of good-time credits without following constitutionally adequate procedures to insure that the credits are not arbitrarily rescinded.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[I]n the context of a prison disciplinary proceeding, due process is satisfied as long as 'the record is not so devoid of evidence that the findings of the disciplinary board were without support or otherwise arbitrary.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “because the “some evidence” standard ... does not permit courts to consider the relative weight of the evidence presented to the disciplinary board, it is ‘[generally immaterial that an accused prisoner pre-' sented exculpatory evidence unless that evidence directly undercuts the reliability if the evidence on which the disciplinary authority relied’ in support of its conclusion.”
    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.