Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 269 F.3d 818 - Davis v. Ruby Foods, Inc.

Davis v. Ruby Foods, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

269 F.3d 818 · 2001

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
September 2019
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 2 district ·

Relationships

Relies on Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit · Salahuddin v. Cuomo · Westinghouse Securities Litigation Md · Bennett v. Schmidt · Simmons v. Abruzzo

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

  1. “authorized to dismiss a complaint merely because it contains repetitious and irrelevant matter, a disposable husk around a core of proper pleading.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the court's jurisdiction depends, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new grounds of jurisdiction to support it, (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, and (3) a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the essential function of a complaint under the civil rules ... is to put the defendant on notice of the plaintiff's claim.”
    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.