Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 25 F.3d 956 - Dr. John Hagelin for President Committee of Kansas v. Graves

Dr. John Hagelin for President Committee of Kansas v. Graves’s Empirical Analysis

25 F.3d 956 · 1994

Citation profile

65
cited by 65 later decisions
November 2024
most recently cited

41 federal appellate · 8 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably Gehl Group v. Koby (1995), Ellis v. United Airlines, Inc. (1996)

41 federal appellate · 8 district ·

6001994200020102020decided

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 Williams v. Rhodes · Anderson v. Celebrezze · Storer v. Brown · Burdick v. Takushi · Jenness v. Fortson

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

  1. “Summary judgment is appropriate if 'there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and ... the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.'”
    24 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “We review the grant or denial of summary judgment de novo, applying the same legal standard used by the district court under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c).”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the extent to which those interests make it necessary to burden the plaintiff's rights.”
    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.