Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 18 F.3d 107 - Gibeau v. Nellis

Gibeau v. Nellis’s Empirical Analysis

18 F.3d 107 · 1994

Citation profile

114
cited by 114 later decisions
2
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

57 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 114 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably Bernheim v. Litt (1996), Kirsch v. Fleet Street, Ltd. (1998)

57 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions

510199420002010decided

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 Carey v. Piphus · Hudson v. McMillian · Dimick v. Schiedt · Delaware v. New York · Smith v. Lightning Bolt Productions, Inc.

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

  1. “[B]ecause appellees failed to raise this procedural defense [of waiver] in the district court, they are the ones who have waived the issue. Where a party has failed to raise an argument in the district court, an appellate court may only consider the argument where necessary to serve an interest of justice.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “an award of nominal damages is not discretionary where a substantive constitutional right has been violated”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““without weighing the credibility of the witnesses or otherwise considering the weight of the evidence, there can be but one conclusion as to the verdict that reasonable [persons] could have reached.” Heller, 891 F.2d at 434 (internal quotations and citation omitted, alteration in original). In addition, the evidence must be construed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and all reasonable inferences must be drawn in that party’s favor. Smith v. Lightning Bolt Productions, Inc., 861 F.2d 363, 367 (2d Cir.1988).”
    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.