Spencer v. Kemna’s Empirical Analysis
91 F.3d 1114 · 1996
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2021
4 federal appellate ·
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
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Sibron v. State of New York Peters · Honig v. Doe · Carafas v. J · Murphy v. Hunt · Marco Defunis et al. v. Charles Odegaard, President of the University of Washington.
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he resolution of this case will not be delayed beyond the requirements of this Court's docket.'' App. 127. Then, on August 23, 1995, the District Court dismissed petitioner's habeas petition.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Spencer v. Kemna“[A]lthough state law may save [a] case from mootness based on public interest, federal courts require litigants' rights be affected.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“'required by law--to prevent such a possibility from occurring.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.