Alvarez v. Hill’s Empirical Analysis
518 F.3d 1152 · 2008
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 6 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably Ortiz v. Downey (2009), Mahmood v. Mahmud (2010)
6 federal appellate · 6 district · 3 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000C
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Neitzke v. Williams · Erickson v. Pardus · Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A. · Turner v. Safley
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[n]otice pleading requires the plaintiff to set forth in his complaint claims for relief, not causes of action, statutes or legal theories,”
3 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.