Brod v. Omya, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
653 F.3d 156 · 2011
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 33 U.S.C. § 1311 · 33 U.S.C. § 1362 · 42 U.S.C. § 6902 · 42 U.S.C. § 6945 · 42 U.S.C. § 6972
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · City of Burlington v. Dague · Hallstrom v. Tillamook County · Hayden v. Paterson
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 152 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“construe the facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party and ... resolve all ambiguities and draw all reasonable inferences against the movant.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he role of the court is not to resolve disputed issues of fact but to assess whether there are any factual issues to be tried.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
5 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.