Applegate v. Top Associates, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
425 F.2d 92 · 1970
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 13 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 137 later decisions — most recently May 2015 · most notably Securities & Exchange Commission v. Research Automation Corp. (1978), Egger v. Phillips (1983)
19 federal appellate · 13 district · 1 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
Relies on First Nat. Bank of Ariz. v. Cities Service Co. · Sartor v. Arkansas Natural Gas Corp. · Arnstein v. Porter · Engl v. Ætna Life Ins. · American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance v. American Broadcasting-Paramount Theatres, Inc.
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 137 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) party opposing a motion for summary judgment simply cannot make a secret of his evidence until the trial, for in doing so he risks the possibility that there will be no trial. A summary judgment motion is intended to 'smoke out' the facts so that the judge can decide if anything remains to be tried.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“prevent the exchange of affidavits on a motion for summaiy judgment from degenerating into mere elaboration of conclusory pleadings”). 28 . See, e.g., Bickerstaff v. Vassar College, 196 F.3d 435, 452 (2d Cir.1999) (McAvoy, C.J., sitting by designation) (”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[Plaintiff], however, has submitted an affidavit grounded on suspicion, and bound together with rumor and hearsay. He has provided the court with the characters and plot line for a novel of intrigue rather than the concrete particulars which would entitle him to a trial. He has no personal knowledge of many of the events recounted in the affidavit____”
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.