Mathieu v. Chun’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

cited by 4 later decisions

March 2019

most recently cited

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 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Estelle v. Gamble · United States v. Diebold, Inc.

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

“If the [nonmovant's] evidence is merely colorable, or is not significantly probative, summary judgment may be granted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. American Freedom Defense Initiative v. Suburban Mobility Auth. for Reg'l Transp.
“must produce evidence that would be sufficient to require submission to the jury of the dispute over the fact.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. American Freedom Defense Initiative v. Suburban Mobility Auth. for Reg'l Transp.

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.