Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 864 F.2d 85 - Richards v. Harper

Richards v. Harper’s Empirical Analysis

864 F.2d 85 · 1988

Citation profile

61
cited by 61 later decisions
1
states following
August 2024
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably Shaw v. Dow Brands, Inc. (1993), Steven M. Desrosiers v. John J. Moran (1991)

22 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

34019881990200020102020decided

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. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1442 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447 · 28 U.S.C. § 1448 · 28 U.S.C. § 1915

Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Anderson v. Creighton · American Fire & Casualty Co. v. Finn · Scharffe v. Perkins

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

  1. “articulate his claims pro se in light: of the complexity of the legal issues involved,”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “We do not supply essential elements of a claim that were not initially pleaded.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “go beyond the pleadings and by her own affidavits, or by the 'depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file,' designate 'specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.'”
    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.