Shah v. Quinlin’s Empirical Analysis
901 F.2d 1241 · 1990
Citation profile
10 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 28 U.S.C. § 2675 · 28 U.S.C. § 636
Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Gregory v. Mitchell · Miller v. Stanmore · Ainsworth Aristocrat International Pty. Ltd. v. Tourism Co. · Holloway v. Gunnell
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Petitioner] should be given the opportunity to amend his complaint to allege and prove that he has exhausted his administrative remedies.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“To the extent [appellant's] claims fell within the Federal Tort Claims Act, his failure to exhaust his administrative remedies would be a jurisdictional bar to proceeding in court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“substantial effort to obtain an administrative remedy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Nigro v. Sullivan
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.