Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 529 F.3d 278 - Whitt v. Stephens County

Whitt v. Stephens County’s Empirical Analysis

529 F.3d 278 · 2008

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
September 2023
most recently cited

5 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently September 2023 · most notably 688 F. Supp. 2d 598 - Rimkus Consulting Group, Inc. v. Cammarata (2010), Oreck Direct, LLC v. Dyson, Inc. (2009)

5 federal appellate ·

280200820102020decided

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 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · City of Canton v. Harris · Byrnie v. Town of Cromwell · Kronisch v. United States · Hare v. City of Corinth, Miss.

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

  1. “Under the spoliation doctrine, a jury may draw an adverse inference 'that a party who intentionally destroys important evidence in bad faith did so because the contents of those documents were unfavorable to that party.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Although [the Court draws] all justifiable inferences in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, the non-movant must present sufficient evidence on which a jury could find in his favor.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “an amendment to substitute a named party for a John Doe does not relate back under Rule 15(c).”
    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.