Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 882 F.2d 899 - Washington v. Bumgarner

Washington v. Bumgarner’s Empirical Analysis

882 F.2d 899 · 1989

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
March 2018
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably Wilder v. Chairman of the Central Classification Board (1991), Clark v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. (1991)

10 federal appellate · 1 district ·

2901989199020002010decided

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

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Browder v. Director Department of Corrections of Illinois · Houston v. Lack · Shah v. Td Hutto Oj Jm Icc Ra Ap Ss · Pryor v. Rc Marshall

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

  1. “'[A] bare notice of appeal should not be construed as a motion for extension of time, where no request for additional time is manifest.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[w]hile notarization of a notice of appeal is not required, it provides an easy way to determine when an appeal was filed, thus preventing a lengthy dispute over this threshold fact. In particular, the notary public's certification serves as prima facie evidence that plaintiff delivered his notice of appeal to prison officials on June 14 and signed or verified his signature on that date.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Houston and Shah are complimentary, because Houston assures that a bare notice of appeal will not be untimely due to the delay of prison authorities.”
    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.