King v. Rivas’s Empirical Analysis
555 F.3d 14 · 2009
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 1 U.S.C. § 1 (Born-Alive Infants Protection Act of 2002) · 28 U.S.C. § 1920 · 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on Marek v. Chesny · Octopi, Inc. v. Courtney · Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. August · Fertel-Rust v. Milwaukee Police Department · Puerto Rico Department of Consumer Affairs v. Isla Petroleum Corp.
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“mandatory in favor of defendants where the recovery failed to exceed the offer”); Sharpe v. Cureton, 319 F.3d 259, 274 (6th Cir.2003) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Upton v. HENDERER
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.