Wright v. Holbrook’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
127 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 210 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably Sammye R. Holloway v. Sally Brush Clermont County, Ohio (2000), Willis v. Sullivan (1991)
127 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 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Thomas v. Arn · Kelly v. Robinson · Medlin v. Mann · United States v. Walters · Stover v. Rau
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 210 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Plaintiff's argument on this issue was raised for the first time in his reply brief. Accordingly, it will not be considered on appeal. The reason for this rule is clear: 'It is impermissible to mention an issue for the first time in a reply brief, because the appellee then has no opportunity to respond.' ... [T]he issue presented in plaintiff's reply brief is far from clear. Since defendant was deprived of an opportunity to address the issue by plaintiff's failure to raise this issue in his original brief, we will consider the issue waived.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“if a federal district judge has reached a permissible conclusion upon a question of local law, the Court of Appeals should not reverse even though it may think the law should be otherwise.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he Sixth Circuit's rule, by precluding appellate review of any issue not contained in objections, prevents a litigant from 'sandbagging' the district judge by failing to object and then appealing.”
3 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.