Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 450 F. Supp. 2d 928 - McCabe v. MacAulay

450 F. Supp. 2d 928 - McCabe v. MacAulay’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
September 2008
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2671 · 28 U.S.C. § 2675 · 28 U.S.C. § 2679 · 42 U.S.C. § 1985

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Anderson v. Creighton

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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he rule should be applied with a spirit of liberality. Although discovery need not be complete before a case is dismissed, summary judgment is proper only if the non-movant has had adequate time for discovery. To this end, Rule 56(f) allows a party to request a delay in granting summary judgment if the party can make a good faith showing that postponement of the ruling would enable it to discover additional evidence which might rebut the movant’s showing of the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. The party is required to show what specific facts further discovery might unveil.”
    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.