Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 87 F.3d 256 - Barge v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.

Barge v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

87 F.3d 256 · 1996

Citation profile

126
cited by 126 later decisions
3
states following
April 2025
most recently cited

50 federal appellate · 19 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 126 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Adler v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (1998), Kim v. Nash Finch Company (1997)

50 federal appellate · 19 district · 5 state decisions

5501996200020102020decided

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 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866)

Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks · Harvey v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc. · Greenwood v. Ross

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

  1. “`not required to speculate on which portion of the record the nonmoving party relies, nor is it obligated to wade through and search the entire record for some specific facts that might support the nonmoving party's claim.'”
    10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “We review the district court's grant of summary judgment de novo, applying the same standard as the district court and examining the record in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.”
    5 later decisions 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.