Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 538 F.2d 90 - Francis A. Kibort v. Robert E. Hampton

Francis A. Kibort v. Robert E. Hampton’s Empirical Analysis

538 F.2d 90 · 1976

Citation profile

76
cited by 76 later decisions
5
states following
June 2017
most recently cited

37 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably Isquith v. Middle South Utilities, Inc. (1988), Barker v. Norman (1981)

37 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

45019761980199020002010decided

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 Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York · Bon Air Hotel, Inc. v. Time, Inc. · Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co. v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad · Enochs v. Sisson

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

  1. “What [Rule 56] contemplates is 10 day advance notice to the adverse party that the matter will be heard and taken under advisement as of a certain day.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Procedures provided by local rule in some districts requiring motions for summary judgment to be accompanied by briefs and requiring opposing affidavits and briefs to be filed within a period of not less than 10 days after which the court will consider the motion submitted for decision would appear to afford adequate hearing within the meaning of Rule 56.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The motion shall be served at least 10 days before the time fixed for the hearing. The adverse party prior to the day of hearing may serve opposing affidavits.”
    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.