Pedraza v. Tibbs’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently April 2010
24 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 12th Judicial District Court)
Relationships
Relies on Neitzke v. Williams · Craddock v. Sunshine Bus Lines, Inc. · Acosta v. United States · Middleton v. Texas Power & Light Co. · Middleton v. Texas Power & Light Co.
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A law is unconstitutional as violating due process [only] when it is arbitrary or unreasonable, and the latter occurs when the social necessity the law is meant to serve is not a sufficient justification of the restriction or the liberty or rights involved.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(1) the allegation of poverty in the affidavit or unsworn declaration is false; (2) the claim is frivolous or malicious; or (3) the inmate filed an affidavit or un-sworn declaration required by this chapter that the inmate knew was false.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McClain v. Terry
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.