Blango v. Thornburgh’s Empirical Analysis
942 F.2d 1487 · 1991
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2023 · most notably Rumsfeld Secretary of Defense v. Padilla et al. (2004), Francisco Vasquez v. Janet Reno Attorney General (2000)
18 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
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
Relies on Cuyler v. Adams · Pernell v. Southall Realty · Howe v. Smith · Tri-State Generation & Transmission Ass'n v. Shoshone River Power, Inc. · Steven Guerra v. Edwin Meese, III
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We are guided by Rule 7(d) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in the United States District Courts, which provides: “The court may require the authentication of any material under subdivision^] (b) and (c).” [Emphasis in original.] We deem the [memorandum of understanding] in question to be part of an expansion of the trial court record____As such, authentication of the exhibit would be discretionary under Rule 7(d)____While petitioner[ ] ... raised the issue of whether the document had been authenticated under the Federal Rules of Evidence, [he] did not challenge the truth of the government’s allegation that the document ... was an accurate copy of the memorandum of understanding[.] Thus, petitioner has not come forward, either in ... the district court or in his brief on appeal, with any indication that the document ... was not a reliable copy of the memorandum of understanding^]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“suffering from continued assault and battery, withholding, stymied and frustrated administrative remediés and a willful failure to treat or prescribe meaningful pain meds.” Even if we could properly grant relief on this motion, Santos would not be entitled to it because his motion amounts to mere “conclusory reiterations of the requirements for an injunction couched in the form of declarative statements,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the person who has custody over [the petitioner].”
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.