Beard v. Stephens’s Empirical Analysis
372 F.2d 685 · 1967
Citation profile
76 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 125 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1998 · most notably Wilson v. Garcia (1985), 5 Fair empl.prac.cas. 587, 5 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 8460 United States of America v. Georgia Power Company, Charles King v. Georgia Power Company (1973)
76 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
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. § 1343 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1985
Relies on Hoffa v. United States · Glidden Company v. Zdanok Et Al. · O'Sullivan v. Felix · Wisconsin v. Illinois · Moviecolor Ltd. v. Eastman Kodak Co.
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 125 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“actions for any injury to the person or rights of another not arising from contract.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The 7th Circuit [has] held the § 1983 and the § 1985 claims, as statutory rights of action, were under the Illinois six-year statutes as “civil action(s) not otherwise provided for.” If we followed that broad approach the claims of appellant all would fall within the Alabama one year statute. Our view is that a procedure which as the first step of the two-step analysis characterizes the claim simply as a “statutory cause of action” does not meet the requirement of establishing the “essential nature” of the claim.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Congress has created many federal rights without prescribing a period of enforcement. In such cases the federal courts borrow the limitations period prescribed by the state where the court sits. The applicable period of limitations is that which the state itself would enforce had an action seeking similar relief been brought in the court of that state.””
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.