Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 611 F.2d 1129 - Lavellee v. Listi

Lavellee v. Listi’s Empirical Analysis

611 F.2d 1129 · 1980

Citation profile

143
cited by 143 later decisions
7
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

61 federal appellate · 11 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 143 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably Berry v. Board of Supervisors of L.S.U. (1983), Page v. United States (1984)

61 federal appellate · 11 district · 9 state decisions

8301980199020002010decided

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. § 2401 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Estelle v. Gamble · Haines v. Kerner · United States v. Kubrick · O'Connor v. Donaldson · Nial Ruth Cox v. A. M. Stanton, M.D.

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

  1. “knows or has reason to know of the injury which is the basis of the action.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]he Supreme Court distinguishes between plaintiff’s knowledge of the ‘factual predicate for a malpractice claim,’ i.e. ‘the fact of his injury [and] its cause,’ and awareness that a legal wrong has been done. See id., [444] U.S. at [121], 100 S.Ct. at 359 & N. 8. By making this distinction, the Supreme Court has rejected the standard which would allow the statute of limitations to commence running before the plaintiff was or should have been aware of the causal connection between his injury and the acts of defendants. Until plaintiff is in possession of the ‘critical facts that he has been hurt and who has inflicted the injury,’ id., the statute of limitations does not commence to run.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “critical facts that he has been hurt and who has inflicted the injury....”
    2 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.