McPherson v. Rankin’s Empirical Analysis
736 F.2d 175 · 1984
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 74 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2013 · most notably Rankin v. McPherson (1987), Ferrara v. Mills (1986)
17 federal appellate · 1 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 18 U.S.C. § 2385 · 18 U.S.C. § 871 (Presidential Threat Protection Act of 2000) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. Doyle · Pickering v. Board of Education of Township High School District 205 Will County Illinois · Connick v. Myers · Givhan v. Western Line Consolidated School District · Watts v. United States
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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In our view, the plain language of Rule 56(c) mandates the entry of summary judgment, after adequate time for discovery and upon motion, against a party who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party’s case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial. In such a situation, there can be “no genuine issue as to any material fact,” since a complete failure of proof concerning an essential element of the nonmoving party’s case necessarily renders all other facts immaterial.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'I hope if they go for him again, they get him.' " Civ. Action No. H-81-1442 (Apr. 15, 1983). In its second decision, the District Court made no explicit finding as to what was said. McPherson's testimony, as reproduced in the text, is only slightly different from the District Court's version, and the distinction is not significant. 4 Rankin testified that, when he asked McPherson whether she meant the remark, she replied, "I sure do.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Rankin v. McPherson“consider the evidence presented in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion.”
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.