Martha Lyons v. Board of Education of Charleston Reorganized School District No. 1 of Mississippi County, Missouri’s Empirical Analysis
523 F.2d 340 · 1975
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 149 later decisions — most recently December 2014 · most notably Johnson v. Oroweat Foods Co. (1986), Jewson v. Mayo Clinic (1982)
29 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 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
Relies on Foman v. Davis · Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. · Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur · Indiana Harbor Belt Railroad v. United States · County of San Diego v. Rincon Band of Mission Indians
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 149 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“its salutary purpose in avoiding a useless, expensive and time consuming trial where there is no genuine, material fact issue to be tried.”
21 later decisions quote this exact passage““When a motion for summary judgment is made and supported as provided in this rule, an adverse party may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of his pleading, but his response, by affidavits or as otherwise provided in this rule, must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. If he does not so respond, summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be entered against him.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“* Summary judgment is always warranted where the party resisting the motion does so by relying solely upon his pleadings and submits no evidence to rebut the moving party’s conclusive demonstration of absence of a genuine issue of material fact. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e) mandates affirmative action by a party opposing such a motion. Failure to take such action justifies a court in entering summary judgment, * * *. (Footnote omitted).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.