Springer v. Durflinger’s Empirical Analysis
518 F.3d 479 · 2008
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 112 later decisions — most recently January 2025 · most notably Argyropoulos v. City of Alton (2008), Grieveson v. Anderson (2008)
20 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 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 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Visser v. Packer Engineering Associates, Inc. · Stone v. City of Indianapolis Public Utilities Division · Rand v. CF Industries, Inc. · Wyninger v. New Venture Gear, Inc.
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 112 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[S]ummary judgment is the put up or shut up moment in a lawsuit, when a party must show what evidence it has that would convince a trier of fact to accept its version of the events.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]t is well-settled that speculation may not be used to manufacture a genuine issue of fact.”). . The”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The district court specifically noted that the complaint was neither frivolous, nor brought in bad faith. If we were in the district court’s position, considering the facts in the first instance, we may well have come to a different conclusion regarding an award of attorneys’ fees. It may have been error — considering the deficiency of evidence — to allow this case to proceed to the discovery phase in the first place. But given that the parents did make it to discovery, they cannot be faulted for trying, but ultimately failing, to gather sufficient evidence of retaliation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cooney v. Casady
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.