835 F. Supp. 710 - Klos v. Haskell’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1654 · 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Foman v. Davis · Haines v. Kerner · Thomas v. Arn · Neitzke v. Williams · Hewitt v. Helms
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“I accept the foregoing program and agree to be bound by the terms and conditions thereof. I understand that my participation in the program is a privilege that may be revoked at any time at the sole discretion of the Commissioner. I understand that I must successfully complete the entire program to obtain a certificate of earned eligibility upon the completion of said program, and in the event that I do not successfully complete said program, for any reason, I will be returned to a non- shock incarceration correctional facility to continue service of my sentence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Klos v. Haskell“Participation in the shock incarceration program shall be a privilege. Nothing contained in this article may be construed to confer upon any inmate the right to participate or continue to participate therein.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Klos v. Haskell
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.