Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 102 F.3d 50 - Malkentzos v. DeBuono

Malkentzos v. DeBuono’s Empirical Analysis

102 F.3d 50 · 1996

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Registercom Inc v. Verio Inc, New York Magazine Division of Primedia Magazines Inc v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority (1998)

9 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

180199620002010decided

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 Murphy v. Hunt · Tull v. United States · Mitchell v. Robert DeMario Jewelry, Inc. · Jackson Dairy, Inc. v. H. P. Hood & Sons, Inc. · Tom Doherty Associates, Inc. v. Saban Entertainment, Inc.

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

  1. “either a likelihood of success on the merits or a sufficiently serious question going to the merits of the claim as to make it a fair ground for litigation plus a balance of hardships that tips decidedly in favor of the moving party.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The fact that [appellant] is no longer eligible to receive early intervention services renders moot the appellants' challenge”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “an error in the substance or form of [its] order,”
    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.