Driver v. Marion County Sheriff’s Empirical Analysis
859 F.3d 489 · 2017
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on County of Riverside v. McLaughlin · Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes · Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes · Szabo v. Bridgeport Machines, Inc. · Oshana v. Coca-Cola Co.
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.
“must find that each requirement of Rule 23(a) (numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation) is satisfied as well as one subsection of Rule 23(b).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“does not mean that the Rule 23 analysis is transformed into a summary judgment motion”
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.