Stevens v. Redwing’s Empirical Analysis
146 F.3d 538 · 1998
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 20 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably Wisdom, Bouchard v. Sundberg (2003)
11 federal appellate · 20 district · 1 state decisions
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 International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Burger King Corporation v. Rudzewicz · Hanson v. Denckla · Larson v. Domestic & Foreign Commerce Corp. · Land US v. Dollar
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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]hen a question of the District Court's jurisdiction is raised, either by a party or by the court on its own motion, the court may inquire, by affidavit or otherwise, into the facts as they exist.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A pro se litigant has no statutory or constitutional right to have counsel appointed in a civil case .... When determining whether to appoint counsel for an indigent civil litigant, the district court considers relevant factors such as the complexity of the case, the ability of the indigent litigant to investigate the facts, the existence of conflicting testimony, and the ability of the indigent to present his claim.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]o defeat a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, the nonmoving party need only make a prima facie showing of jurisdiction. If the district court does not hold a hearing and instead relies on pleadings and affidavits, ... the court must look at the facts in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and resolve all factual conflicts in favor of that party.”
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.