573 F. App'x 3 - Brown v. Hill’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district ·

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

1. “that the case be remanded for the district court to reconsider the dismissal of [the plaintiffs] complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. [The plaintiffs] complaint alleges that the defendants, at least one of whom is alleged to be a District of Columbia employee, wrongfully disclosed his medical information and deprived him of his liberty by making false allegations to the police. The civil cover sheet accompanying the complaint cites 42 U.S.C. § 1983 as the civil statute under which the case of action was filed. It appears, therefore, that [the plaintiff] was attempting to invoke the district court’s jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question jurisdiction) .... But if [the plaintiff] were to file a new complaint stating the basis for the district court’s jurisdiction, the complaint would be time-barred .... Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the district court is directed to allow [the plaintiff] to amend his complaint to clearly state the jurisdictional basis for this action and all of the claims [he] is attempting to raise ....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Brown v. Hill