Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 925 F.2d 666 - Welch v. Folsom

Welch v. Folsom’s Empirical Analysis

925 F.2d 666 · 1991

Citation profile

84
cited by 84 later decisions
1
states following
August 2024
most recently cited

41 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 84 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably McGuckin v. Smith (1992), Ciralsky v. Central Intelligence Agency (2004)

41 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

4701991200020102020decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1915

Relies on Neitzke v. Williams · Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay · Browder v. Director Department of Corrections of Illinois · Catlin v. United States · United States v. Robinson

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

  1. “If the plaintiff ... elects to stand on the dismissed complaint, however, we have held that the order of dismissal [without prejudice] is final and appealable”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he officers of the court shall issue and serve all process, and perform all duties in [ifp] cases”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “is jurisdictional, and cannot be extended in the discretion of the district court.”
    3 later decisions 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.