Labram v. Havel’s Empirical Analysis
43 F.3d 918 · 1995
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 40 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 143 later decisions — most recently February 2022 · most notably Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc. v. American Eagle Outfitters, Inc. (2002), Trulock v. Freeh (2001)
15 federal appellate · 40 district ·
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 Conley v. Gibson · Poffenberger v. Risser · Revene v. Charles County Commissioners · Petersen v. Bruen
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 143 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[l]egal labels characterizing a claim cannot, standing alone, determine whether it fails to meet this extremely modest standard. Even where such a label reflects a flat misapprehension by counsel respecting a claim's legal basis, dismissal on that ground alone is not warranted so long as any needed correction of legal theory will not prejudice the opposing party.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“only if it can be said that on the claim as pleaded the claimant can prove no set of facts that would entitle her to relief.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.