Munz v. Michael’s Empirical Analysis
28 F.3d 795 · 1994
Citation profile
28 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 113 later decisions — most recently May 2024 · most notably Johnson v. Outboard Marine Corp. (1999), Rural Water System 1 v. City of Sioux Center (1997)
28 federal appellate ·
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 28 U.S.C. § 1915
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Siegert v. Gilley · Whitley v. Albers · Hudson v. McMillian
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 113 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Rule 56. Summary Judgment (b) For Defending Party. A party against whom a claim ... is asserted ... may, at any time, move for summary judgment in the party’s favor as to all or any part thereof. (c) Motions and Proceedings Thereon.... The judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
57 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Rule 56. Summary Judgment (b) For Defending Party. A party against whom a claim ... is asserted ... may, at any time, move for a summary judgment in the party’s favor as to all or any part thereof. (c) Motions and Proceedings Thereon.... The judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the ‘pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]t is a well-established legal rule that a state prisoner is without standing to contest a federal court's issuance of a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum.”
2 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.