Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 141 F.3d 322 - Cook v. Winfrey

Cook v. Winfrey’s Empirical Analysis

141 F.3d 322 · 1998

Citation profile

85
cited by 85 later decisions
3
states following
July 2024
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 85 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Bennett v. Schmidt (1998), Willie Jacobs and Linda Siller v. City of Chicago (2000)

22 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

5301998200020102020decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)

Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co. · Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment · Hishon v. King & Spalding · Mansfield Ry Co v. Swan

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

  1. “A court may dismiss a complaint [under Rule 12(b)(6) ] only if it is clear that no relief could be granted under any set of facts that could be proved consistent with the allegations.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “entire argument strays rather far afield from the minimal requirements of federal notice pleading. Having alleged that [defendant] improperly interfered with his “ability to enter into contracts or business relationships with third parties interested in purchasing the rights to publication of his experiences” ..., [plaintiff] is under no obligation to plead further the facts that he believes support his claim.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56, and all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 56.”
    1 later decision 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.