Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 534 F.3d 1282 - Bryson v. Gonzales

Bryson v. Gonzales’s Empirical Analysis

534 F.3d 1282 · 2008

Citation profile

72
cited by 72 later decisions
1
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 50 district · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Brady v. State of Maryland · Mathews v. Eldridge · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Duncan v. Walker

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

  1. “a complaint still must contain either direct or inferential allegations respecting all the material elements necessary to sustain a recovery under some viable legal theory.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “We reiterate that “[c]ontext matters in notice pleading. Fair notice under Rule 8(a)(2) depends on the type of case.” Phillips [v. County of Allegheny, 515 F.3d 224, 239-40 (3d Cir.2008)]. In § 1983 cases, defendants often include the government agency and a number of government actors sued in their individual capacities. Therefore it is particularly important in such circumstances that the complaint make clear exactly who is alleged to have done what to whom, to provide each individual with fair notice as to the basis of the claims against him or her, as distinguished from collective allegations against the state. See [Bell Atlantic Corp. v.] Twombly, [ 550 U.S. 544 ] 127 S.Ct. at 1970 -71 n. 10 [ 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) ].”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “claim to relief ... plausible on its face.”
    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.