Omdahl v. Lindholm’s Empirical Analysis
170 F.3d 730 · 1999
Citation profile
8 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently April 2012
8 federal appellate ·
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 Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Anderson v. Creighton · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Tennessee v. Garner · Johnson v. Jones
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“would require [the Court] to decide a material issue of fact,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lunini v. Grayeb
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.