Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 540 F.3d 742 - Jenkins v. Winter

Jenkins v. Winter’s Empirical Analysis

540 F.3d 742 · 2008

Citation profile

92
cited by 92 later decisions
1
states following
December 2024
most recently cited

38 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 92 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably Gallagher v. Magner ex rel. City of St. Paul's Department of Neighborhood Housing & Property Improvement (2010), United States v. Lozoya (2010)

38 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions

630200820102020decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1746 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Faragher v. City of Boca Raton · Monge v. California · Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth · Smith v. St. Louis University · Chay-Velasquez v. Ashcroft

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

  1. “Claims not raised in an opening brief are deemed waived.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “This court does not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal in a reply brief unless the appellant gives some reason for failing to raise and brief the issue in his opening brief.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Rule 56(e)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires affidavits to be `made on personal knowledge, set out facts that would be admissible in evidence, and show that the affiant is competent to testify on the matters stated.'”
    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.