212 F. Supp. 32 - Swartz v. Eberly’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently June 2017
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 National Labor Relations Board v. Hearst Publications, Inc. · Feller v. New Amsterdam Cas. Co. · Gailey v. State Workmen's Insurance Fund · Philadelphia Record Co. v. Curtis-Martin Newspapers, Inc. · Thomas v. Bache
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A motion to dismiss may only be granted in the clearest of cases. Where additional facts obviously are required before an ultimate judgment may be formed, the motion must fall. ‘[A] complaint should not be dismissed for insufficiency unless it appears to a certainty that plaintiff is entitled to no relief under any state of facts which could be proved in support of the claim.’ 2 Moore, Federal Practice (2d ed.), § 12.08, p. 2245.””
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.