Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 149 F.3d 507 - Robinson v. Runyon

Robinson v. Runyon’s Empirical Analysis

149 F.3d 507 · 1998

Citation profile

73
cited by 73 later decisions
1
states following
April 2020
most recently cited

31 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 73 later decisions — most recently April 2020 · most notably Smith v. Chrysler Corp. (1998), United States v. Talley (1999)

31 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions

5501998200020102020decided

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 Federal Deposit Insurance v. Meyer · United States v. Bonds · Kline v. Tennessee Valley Authority · Abrams v. Lightolier Inc. · Mary J. Riordan v. William L. Kempiners and Shirley Randolph

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

  1. “Unfair prejudice does not mean the damage to a defendant's case that results from the legitimate probative force of the evidence; rather it refers to evidence which tends to suggest a decision on an improper basis.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “rarely will there be direct evidence from the lips of the defendant proclaiming his or her ... animus,”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “any tendency to make the existence of any fact . . . more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.”
    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.