Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 958 F.2d 955 - Hunter v. Aispuro

Hunter v. Aispuro’s Empirical Analysis

958 F.2d 955 · 1992

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
December 1998
most recently cited

7 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Relies on Coleman v. Thompson · Murray v. Carrier · United States v. Frady · Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority · Michigan v. Long

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

  1. “Reading a pro forma state court decision as relying on state procedural grounds when those grounds are argued to the state court and are dispositive is consistent with established practice.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “applies only when it fairly appears that a state court judgment rested primarily on federal law or was interwoven with federal law, that is, in those cases where a federal court has good reason to question whether there is an independent and adequate state ground for the decision.”
    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.