Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 128 F.3d 166 - Reynolds v. Wagner

Reynolds v. Wagner’s Empirical Analysis

128 F.3d 166 · 1997

Citation profile

107
cited by 107 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
August 2020
most recently cited

25 federal appellate · 4 district · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 107 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2020 · most notably Cone v. Bell (2009), In re Trans World Airlines Incorporated Interface Group-Nevada Incorporated (1998)

25 federal appellate · 4 district · 11 state decisions

4901997200020102020decided

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 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Mathews v. Eldridge · Estelle v. Gamble · Turner v. Safley · Lewis Director Arizona Department of Corrections v. Casey · Joshua Deshaney, a Minor, by His Guardian Ad Litem, and Melody Deshaney,s v. Winnebago County Department of Social Services, et al.

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

  1. “[A]n argument consisting of no more than a conclusory assertion [consisting of a single statement] (without even a citation to the record) will be deemed waived.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a personal expense that [the plaintiff] can meet and would be required to meet in the outside world.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “appellate courts generally should not address legal issues that the parties have not developed through proper briefing”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.