Moore v. Martin’s Empirical Analysis
854 F.3d 1021 · 2017
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 52 U.S.C. § 20302
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Anderson v. Celebrezze · Storer v. Brown · Eu v. San Francisco County Democratic Central Committee · Tashjian v. Republican Party of Connecticut
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“whether the verification of independent candidate petitions would conflict with the processing of other signature petitions under the former May 1 deadline.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Moore v. Thurston“the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“challenged statute is narrowly drawn to serve the State's compelling interest.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Moore v. Thurston
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.