Spivey v. Zant’s Empirical Analysis
683 F.2d 881 · 1982
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019 · most notably Maxwell v. Florida (1986), Means v. State (2004)
7 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 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
Relies on Estelle v. Smith · Spivey v. Zant
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a party may obtain discovery of documents ... otherwise discoverable under subdivision (b)(1) of this rule and prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party ... only upon a showing that the party seeking discovery has substantial need of the materials.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The district court’s view that Spivey was not entitled to access to the requested materials because they belonged to Schloth is untenable. Spivey, Schloth’s former client, sought materials generated during and pertinent to the representation. Absent any assertion by Schloth of some particularized and superior interest in the materials, Spivey was entitled to all portions of Schloth’s file relevant to the proceedings in the district court.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“We are confident that the District Judge ... is capable of according Spivey the fair hearing to which he is entitled.”
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.