Marshall v. Gates’s Empirical Analysis
44 F.3d 722 · 1995
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 10 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Provenz v. Miller (1996), Ghazali v. Moran (1995)
31 federal appellate · 10 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Henry v. Gill Industries, Inc. · United States v. Hvass · United States v. Lopez-Cavasos
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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Local rules are ‘laws of the United States,’ ”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] motion for summary judgment cannot be granted simply because the opposing party violated a local rule.... Here the district court’s refusal to consider [the plaintiffs papers opposing summary judgment] led it to conclude that the case “contains no factual evidence other than those facts presented by defendants.” This conclusion resulted in summary judgment for [the defendant]. The practical effect, therefore, was to grant summary judgment as a sanction for the late filing, a result inconsistent with our holding in Henry .... For violation of the local rule the district court will be free to devise such sanctions as seem appropriate short of granting summary judgment where the movant has failed to meet its burden of demonstrating the absence of triable issues.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] motion for summary judgment cannot be granted simply because the opposing party violated a local rule.”
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.