Brown v. Teitelbaum’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
12 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Antonopoulos v. Town of Telluride · Espinoza v. O'DELL · Morrison v. City of Aurora · Dillingham v. Greeley Publishing Co. · State v. Young
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) [blas received such notice of the institution of the action that [the party] will not be prejudiced in maintaining [a] defense ... and (2) knew or should have known that, but for a mistake concerning the identity of the proper party, the action would have been brought against [that party].”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[A] genuine issue of material fact cannot be raised simply by allegations of pleadings or argument of counsel. Rather, in response to a motion for summary judgment, an adverse party must by affidavit or otherwise set forth specific facts showing there is a genuine issue for trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“because it is undisputed that these defendants were not named as parties within the period provided by law for commencing the action against them, the trial court did not err in dismissing these claims”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.