4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 201 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Heck v. Humphrey.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Heck v. Humphrey Anchor | green | “civil tort actions are not appropriate vehicles for challenging the validity of outstanding criminal judgments.” | 118 |
| 2 | Butler v. Compton | green | “from using a 1983 action, with its more lenient pleading rules, to challenge their conviction or sentence without complying with the more stringent exhaustion requirements for habeas actions.” | 42 |
| 3 | Nichols v. Baer | green | “in heck, the supreme court explained that a 1983 action that would impugn the validity of a plaintiff's incarceration cannot be maintained unless the basis for incarceration has been reversed on direct appeal or impaired by collateral proceedings.” | 32 |
| 4 | Butler v. Compton | green | “the purpose behind heck is to prevent litigants from using a 1983 action, with its more lenient pleading rules, to challenge their conviction or sentence without complying with the more stringent exhaustion requirements for habeas actions.” | 9 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.