Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 999 F.2d 401 - Lynch v. Blodgett

Lynch v. Blodgett’s Empirical Analysis

999 F.2d 401 · 1993

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
1
states following
July 2015
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently July 2015

15 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

130199320002010decided

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. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Barefoot v. Estelle · Wages v. Internal Revenue Service · Cel-A-Pak v. California Agricultural Labor Relations Board · Lindsey v. Thigpen · Gardner v. Pogue

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

  1. “[a]n appeal may not be taken to the court of appeals from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding [by a state prisoner], unless the justice or judge who rendered the order or a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of probable cause.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Title 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2253 establishes the issuance of a certificate of probable cause as a jurisdictional prerequisite to appellate review from 'the final order' in a federal habeas proceeding by a state prisoner.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “substantial showing of the denial of a federal right,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.