Rachel v. Troutt’s Empirical Analysis
820 F.3d 390 · 2016
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Mallard v. United States Dist. Court for Southern Dist. of Iowa · Hall v. Bellmon · Martinez v. Aaron · Reilly v. United States · Leamer v. Fauver
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“courts treat this power as “the exception and not the rule,” limiting appointment of experts to the “truly extraordinary cases where the introduction of outside skills and expertise, not possessed by the judge, will hasten the just adjudication of a dispute without dislodging the delicate balance of the juristic role.” Reilly v. United States, 863 F.2d 149, 156 (1st Cir.1988).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Willis v. Palmer“Courts order the [investigative] report not to provide discovery, but to aid in screening the complaint.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lamb v. Norwood“Each step of this [deliberate indifference] inquiry is fact-intensive.”
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.