Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 174 F.3d 987 - Tworivers v. Lewis

Tworivers v. Lewis’s Empirical Analysis

174 F.3d 987 · 1999

Citation profile

213
cited by 213 later decisions
1
states following
August 2019
most recently cited

49 federal appellate · 10 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 213 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably Olsen v. Idaho State Board of Medicine (2004), Jones v. Blanas (2004)

49 federal appellate · 10 district · 1 state decisions

1640199920002010decided

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 Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Wilson v. Garcia · Lindh v. Murphy · Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc. · Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital

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

  1. “[u]nder federal law, a claim accrues when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know of the injury which is the basis of the action.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “accept all factual allegations of the complaint as true and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Although state law determines the length of the limitations period, federal law determines when a civil rights claim accrues.”
    3 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.