Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 98 F.3d 1548 - Farmer v. E.k. McDaniel

Farmer v. E.k. McDaniel’s Empirical Analysis

98 F.3d 1548 · 1996

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
February 2023
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2023 · most notably Slack v. McDaniel (2000), Michael Anthony v. Steven Cambra, Jr., Warden (2000)

17 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

2101996200020102020decided

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 Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Younger v. Harris · Rose v. Lundy · Sanders v. United States · Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp.

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

  1. “A second or successive petition [alleging new and different grounds] may be dismissed if _ the judge finds that the failure of the petitioner to assert those grounds in a prior petition constituted an abuse of the writ.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “by reference to the date when he filed his first petition. Like Keating, Henry filed his original petition when he was clearly in custody and like Keating I, the original petition was dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust. Henry filed his second petition after his release from prison and discharge from parole, but he argued that he was in actual custody on the theory that the date he filed the earlier habeas was the operative date--not the date he filed the present petition. We disagreed, noting that”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “By its terms, Rule 9(b) appears to contemplate two possibilities for a dismissal of a second or successive petition: one, if the judge finds that it does not allege new or different grounds and the prior determination was on the merits; the other, if new and different grounds are alleged and the judge finds that the petitioner’s failure to assert them in a prior petition was an abuse of the writ.”
    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.