Woods v. Dugan’s Empirical Analysis
660 F.2d 379 · 1981
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently December 2013 · most notably Martin v. Sargent (1985), Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. v. SciMed Life Systems, Inc. (1993)
14 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
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. § 1915 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Dayco Corp. v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. · Jablon v. Dean Witter & Co. · Mazaleski v. Treusdell · Murphy v. Inexco Oil Co. · Potrero Hill Community Action Committee v. Housing Authority
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“must be treated as a motion for summary judgment when matters outside the pleadings are presented and not excluded by the trial court.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“reasonable opportunity to present all materials made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 56.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Because the district court considered the supporting affidavit in ruling on the defense motion in the instant case, the motion for dismissal of the complaint was in effect converted to a motion for summary judgment, and we must review the order granting the motion as one granting summary judgment.”
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.