Brasic v. Heinemann's Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

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

1. “a concise response to the movant’s statement that shall contain: (A) a response to each numbered paragraph in the moving party’s statement, including, in the case of any disagreement, specific references to the affidavits, parts of the record, and other supporting materials relied upon, and (B) a statement, consisting of short numbered paragraphs, of any additional facts that require the denial of summary judgment, including references to the affidavits, parts of the record, and other supporting materials relied upon.”

   10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Curran v. Kwon · Garrison v. Burke

2. “[A] failure to properly contest in the 12(N) statement of material facts set out in the movant’s 12(M) statement, constitutes a binding admission of those facts. In such a case, we “depart from our usual posture of construing all facts in favor of the nonmoving party; rather we accept as true all material facts contained in [the moving party’s] 12(M) statement.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Cross v. Chicago School Reform Board of Trustees

3. “where the nonmovant has failed to submit a factual statement in the form called for by the pertinent rule and thereby conceded the movant's version of the facts,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Johnny Blastoff, Incorporated v. Los Angeles Rams Football Company, St. Louis Rams Partnership, National Football League Properties, Incorporated