Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 813 F.2d 821 - Pryzina v. Ley

Pryzina v. Ley’s Empirical Analysis

813 F.2d 821 · 1987

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
October 2018
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably Rjr Services Inc v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Company (1989), Spencer v. Lee (1989)

14 federal appellate · 1 district ·

1601987199020002010decided

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. § 1341 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988

Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Haines v. Kerner · Imbler v. Pachtman · Butz v. Economou · Stump v. Sparkman

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

  1. “[D]ismissal is therefore only proper where 'it appears beyond doubt that [the plaintiffs] can prove no set of facts in support of [their] claims which would entitle [them] to relief.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[i]nsofar as the complaint seeks declaratory relief or damages”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The district courts shall not enjoin, suspend or restrain the assessment, levy or collection of any tax under State law where a plain, speedy and efficient remedy may be had in the courts of such State.”
    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.