Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 749 F.3d 573 - Kinlin v. Kline

Kinlin v. Kline’s Empirical Analysis

749 F.3d 573 · 2014

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
2
states following
October 2024
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Illinois v. Gates · Brinegar v. United States · Whren 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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Scott’s holding is twofold. First, Scott stands for the proposition that witness accounts seeking to contradict an unambiguous video recording do not create a triable issue. [Scott, 550 U.S.] at 380-81, 127 S.Ct. 1769 .... Second, Scott reaffirmed the holdings of Matsushita [Elec. Indus., Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587 , 106 S.Ct. 1348 , 89 L.Ed.2d 538 (1986) ] and Anderson [v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 , 106 S.Ct. 2505 , 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986) ] that, in disposing of a motion for summary judgment, a court, need draw only reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party; it need not construe the record in such a manner that is wholly unsupportable — in the view of any reasonable jury — by the video recording.”
    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.