Cluster 108290
green
· 726 citation events
across 58 courts.
Showing the 50 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
yellow
BNSF Ry. Co. v. Tyrrell (2017)
But cf. Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487 , 490, n. 4, 91 S.Ct. 995 , 28 L.Ed.2d 251 (1971) (though "Congress has provided for nationwide service of process" in 28 U.S.C. § 1391 (e) (1964 ed., Supp.
though "Congress has provided for nationwide service of process" in 28 U.S.C. § 1391 (e) (1964 ed., Supp. V), that statute was meant to expand venue, not personal jurisdiction
yellow
BNSF R. Co. v. Tyrrell (2017)
But cf. Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U. S. 487, 490, n. 4 (1971) (though “Congress has provided for nationwide service of process” in 28 U. S. C. §1391 (e) (1964 ed., Supp.
though “Congress has provided for nationwide service of process” in 28 U. S. C. §1391 (e) (1964 ed., Supp. V), that statute was meant to expand venue, not personal jurisdiction
See AARP v. Trump, 605 U.S. 91 , 107 (2025) (Alito, J., dissenting) (“[I]n accordance with Rule 81, we have acknowledged that some Federal Rules are inapplicable in habeas.”); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487 , 490 n.4 (1971) (“Though habeas corpus is technically ‘civil,’ it is not automatically subject to all the rules governing ordinary civil actions.”).
“Though habeas corpus is technically ‘civil,’ it is not automatically subject to all the rules governing ordinary civil actions.”
green
Daley v. Choate (2025)
Moreover, every federal circuit court existing at the time of the EAJA’s passage had held that habeas was civil. 5 See, e.g., Mercado v. United States, 183 F.2d 486, 487 (1st Cir. 1950) (“[H]abeas corpus [] has always 4 See also, e.g., Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487 , 490 n.4 (1971) (“[H]abeas corpus is technically ‘civil[.]’”); Heflin v. United States, 358 U.S. 415 , 418 n.7 (1959) (“[A] petition for a writ of habeas corpus is . . . an independent civil suit.” (internal…
“[H]abeas corpus is technically ‘civil[.]’”
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971). 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (d) “explicitly” governs the jurisdiction of a federal court over habeas petitions.
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971). 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (d) “explicitly” governs the jurisdiction of a federal court over habeas petitions.
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971). 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (d) “explicitly” governs the jurisdiction of a federal court over habeas petitions.
green
Jones 603497 v. Douglas (2024)
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971).
green
Jones v. Macauley (2024)
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971).
green
Strausbaugh 949492 v. Braman (2024)
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n.3 (1971). 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (d) “explicitly” governs the jurisdiction of a federal court over habeas petitions.
green
Strausbaugh v. Braman (2024)
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n.3 (1971). 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (d) “explicitly” governs the jurisdiction of a federal court over habeas petitions.
green
Caldwell, Jr. v. Morrison (2022)
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971). 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (d) “explicitly” governs the jurisdiction of a federal court over habeas petitions.
green
Caldwell 406128, Jr. v. Morrison (2022)
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971). 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (d) “explicitly” governs the jurisdiction of a federal court over habeas petitions.
green
Edmond v. Rewerts (2021)
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971). 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (d) “explicitly” governs the jurisdiction of a federal court over habeas petitions.
green
Edmond 538334 v. Rewerts (2021)
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971). 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (d) “explicitly” governs the jurisdiction of a federal court over habeas petitions.
green
Johnson v. Morrison (2021)
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971).
Zatkoff, J.
green
Johnson v. Parish (2021)
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971).
Zatkoff, J.
green
Johnson 937143 v. Parish (2021)
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971).
Zatkoff, J.
green
Perry v. Washington (2020)
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971).
citing to Rumsfeld, 542 U.S. at 435
green
Madison v. Rewerts (2020)
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. at 443 ; Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971).
green
Madison 503638 v. Rewerts (2020)
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. at 443 ; Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971).
green
Young v. Horton (2019)
Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 443 (2004); Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484, 497 (1973); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 3 (1971).
green
Alhassan, Rasheed v. Hagee, Michael W. (2005)
Parisi v. Davidson, 405 U.S. 34, 35 (1972); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 489 (1971); Oestereich v. Selective Serv.
green
Moore, Frank v. Olson, Keith E. (2004)
In between these two decisions, Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490-91 (1971), referred to the matter as one of “territorial jurisdiction”, which implies that the issue is one of venue rather than either subject-matter or personal jurisdiction, but once again the Court did not explain why.
green
In Re United States Parole Commission (1986)
Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court, 410 U.S. 484, 495 , 93 S.Ct. 1123, 1130 , 35 L.Ed.2d 443, 452 (1973): Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 491 , 91 S.Ct. 995, 998 , 28 L.Ed.2d 251, 255 (1971); see Starnes v. McGuire, supra note 26, 168 U.S.App.D.C. at 17-18 , 512 F.2d at 931-932 . 42 .
green
United States v. Westinghouse Electric Corp. (1985)
Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 4 [ 91 S.Ct. 995, 997, n. 4 , 28 L.Ed.2d 251 ] (1971).
green
Stafford v. Briggs (1980)
Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U. S. 487, 490, n. 4 (1971).
green
Jones v. Watkins (1976)
Samuels, 329 U.S. 304, 312 , 67 S.Ct. 313 , 91 L.Ed. 308 (1946); Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 489, 91 S.Ct. 995 , 28 L.Ed.2d 251 (1971).
green
Lowenstein v. Rooney (1975)
Furthermore, venue for the second cause of action would be proper in the District of Columbia, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 (b), and since section 1391(e) was intended to permit actions which could only be brought in the District of Columbia to be brought in other districts, Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487, 490, n. 4 , 91 S.Ct. 995 , 28 L.Ed.2d 251 (1971), venue in the Eastern District of New York is proper.
Id. at 389-392, 91 S.Ct. 995 . 36 . 406 U.S. 341, 344 , 92 S.Ct. 1693, 1695 , 32 L.Ed.2d 141 (1972). 37 .
“The question * * * is whether any * * * one in the chain of command, as well as the person detained, must be in the territorial jurisdiction of the District Court. * * * [Petitioner [Schlanger] is within the territorial jurisdiction of the District Court * * 401 U.S. at 489-490 , 91 S.Ct. at 997 (emphasis added). .
emphasis added
green
Marcia R.Q. v. Pamela Bondi, et al. (2026)
See Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487 , 490 n.4 (1971) (“Though habeas corpus is technically ‘civil,’ it is not automatically subject to all the rules governing ordinary civil actions.”); Obando-Segura v. Garland, 999 F.3d 190, 196 (4th Cir. 2021) (“But [Schlanger] held that ‘civil action’ [as used in § 1391] did not encompass a habeas proceeding, so the custodian could not be served.”); Cristian O. v. Bondi, No. 26-cv-853 (PAM/LIB), 2026 WL 266167 , at *1 (D.
See Abioye Opening Br. 21 (quoting Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487 , 490 n.4 (1971)), 27 (quoting Santana, 98 F.3d at 754 ).
green
Ballard v. Disbrow (2022)
See id. at 489–92.
green
Banister v. Davis (2020)
See Schlanger v. Seamans , 401 U.S. 487 , 489-491, and n. 4, 91 S.Ct. 995 , 28 L.Ed.2d 251 (1971).
green
Proffitt v. Warden LaRose (2019)
See Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286 .” Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487 , n. 4 at 490.
green
Kanai v. McHugh (2011)
See id. at 489-91 .
green
Kanai v. McHugh (2011)
See id. at 489-91 , 91 S.Ct. 995 .
green
Rooney v. Secretary of the Army (2005)
See Schlanger, 401 U.S. at 490-91 , 91 S.Ct. 995 (1971); Monk, 793 F.2d at 371 .
green
Sidney Coal Co., Inc. v. Massanari (2002)
See section 11(A), supra, and Schlanger , 401 U.S. 487 , 91 S.Ct. 995 .
green
Coalition of Clergy v. Bush (2002)
Dunne v. Henman, 875 F.2d 244, 248 (9th Cir.1989); accord, Schlanger, 401 U.S. at 490 n. 4, 91 S.Ct. 995 . 10 It is clear, then, that because there is no showing or allegation that any named respondent is within the territorial jurisdiction of the Central District of California, this court lacks jurisdiction to issue the writ requested by petitioners.
green
In Re: Austen O. Nwanze (2001)
See Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487 , 490 n. 4, 91 S.Ct. 995 , 998 n. 4, 28 L.Ed.2d 251 (1971); see also Fed.R.Civ.P. 81(a)(2).
green
In Re Nwanze (2001)
See Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487 , 490 n.4, 91 S.Ct. 995 , 998 n.4 (1971); see also Fed.
green
Malone v. Calderon (1999)
See Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487 , 91 S.Ct. 995 , 28 L.Ed.2d 251 (1971).
green
Kelvin Shelby Malone v. Arthur Calderon, Warden of the California State Prison, San Quentin, State of Missour… (1999)
See Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487 , 91 S.Ct. 995 , 28 L.Ed.2d 251 (1971).
green
Terry v. United States Parole Commission (1990)
See Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. at 489 -90 & n. 4, 91 S.Ct. at 997 -98 & n. 4 (observing that 28 U.S.C. § 1391 (e) (1988) was not meant to expand habeas corpus jurisdiction).
See Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487 , 490 n. 4, 91 S.Ct. 995 , 997-98 n. 4, 28 L.Ed.2d 251 (1971); Santa Fe Internad Corp. v. Watt, 580 F.Supp. 27, 29 (D.Del. 1984).
green
United States ex rel. Jensen v. Flatley (1982)
See Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487 , 91 S.Ct. 995 , 28 L.Ed.2d 251 (1971); United States ex rel.
green
Rodney D. Driver v. Richard Helms (1978)
See note 17, infra 13 See note 10, supra 14 The Supreme Court has said that § 1391(e) does not apply to habeas corpus actions, Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487 , 490 n. 4, 91 S.Ct. 995, 998 , 28 L.Ed.2d 251 (1971), but that decision turned on the special nature of habeas corpus actions which though "technically 'civil,' . . . (are) not automatically subject to all the rules governing ordinary civil actions." See also the cases cited by the court below. 74 F.R.D. at 391 -92…
green
Arnold R. Jago, Superintendent v. United States District Court, Northern District of Ohio, Eastern Division a… (1978)
Habeas corpus practice in the federal courts has conformed with civil practice only in a general sense.” Harris v. Nelson, 394 U.S. 286, 294 , 89 S.Ct. 1082, 1087 , 22 L.Ed.2d 281 (1969); accord, Schlanger v. Seamans, 401 U.S. 487 , 490 n. 4, 91 S.Ct. 995 , 28 L.Ed.2d 251 (1971).