Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 680 F.3d 234 - Johnson v. Killian

Johnson v. Killian’s Empirical Analysis

680 F.3d 234 · 2012

Citation profile

110
cited by 110 later decisions
February 2025
most recently cited

5 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1997E · 42 U.S.C. § 2000B

Relies on Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Jones v. Bock · Woodford v. Ngo · Correction Officer Porters v. Ronald Nussle

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

  1. “required to resolve all ambiguities and draw all permissible factual inferences in favor of the party against whom summary judgment is sought.”
    17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[s]ummary judgment is appropriate [only] where the record taken as a whole could not lead a rational trier of fact to find for the [non-movant].”
    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.