Jecies v. Matsuda’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)
Relies on International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Longines-Wittnauer Watch Co. v. Barnes & Reinecke, Inc. · United States v. Utah Construction & Mining Co. · Arrowsmith v. United Press International
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is well-settled that the party moving for summary judgment has the burden of demonstrating that the Rule. 56(c) test — ‘no genuine issue as to any material fact’ — is satisfied and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The movant is held to a stringent standard. Before summary judgment will be granted it must be clear what the truth is and any doubt as to the existence of a genuine issue of material fact will be resolved against the movant. Because the burden is on the movant, the evidence presented to the court always is construed in favor of the party opposing the motion .... ” (Footnotes omitted.)”
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.