Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 221 F.3d 1059 - Stanbury Law Firm, P.A. v. Internal Revenue Service

Stanbury Law Firm, P.A. v. Internal Revenue Service’s Empirical Analysis

221 F.3d 1059 · 2000

Citation profile

78
cited by 78 later decisions
2
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 16 district · 3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Frey v. City of Herculaneum · Lunsford v. United States · Federal Deposit Insurance v. Niblo · 829 F. Supp. 1103 - Resolution Trust Corp. v. Gibson

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

  1. “(f) Motion to Strike. The court may strike from a pleading an insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter. The court may act: (1) on its own; or (2) on motion made by a party either before responding to the pleading or, if a response is not allowed, within 21 days after being served with the pleading.”
    16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[m]otions to strike under [ Rule] 12(f) are viewed with disfavor and are infrequently granted.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Thus, the recent amendment did not change the standards for a Rule 12(b)(6) motion. 4 . The language of Rule 12(f) was also”
    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.