Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 871 F.2d 1346 - Samuels v. Wilder

Samuels v. Wilder’s Empirical Analysis

871 F.2d 1346 · 1989

Citation profile

49
cited by 49 later decisions
3
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

20 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably In re Vitreous Steel Products Co. (1990), Rohrbough v. Wyeth Laboratories, Inc. (1990)

20 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

3501989199020002010decided

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

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Publishers Resource, Inc. v. Walker-Davis Publications, Inc. · Donald v. Polk County · Levine v. Shell Oil 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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[m]erely alleging a factual dispute cannot defeat [a] summary judgment motion.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The Owner [plaintiff] agrees to indemnify the Nominee, his successors, and assigns, and to hold Nominee harmless from all liability, loss, expenses, damages, costs and attorney’s fees that Nominee may at any time incur by reason of any type of inquiry, action or suit which may be brought against him or made of him by any person, firm, corporation, or governmental agency or authority or anyone else by reason of the nominee-ship.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “no need exists to resort to other means of interpretation, and the effect must be given to the parties' intent as indicated in the language itself.”
    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.