Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 874 F.2d 1085 - Medlin v. Palmer

Medlin v. Palmer’s Empirical Analysis

874 F.2d 1085 · 1989

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
4
states following
August 2014
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably Christophersen v. Allied-Signal Corp. (1991), Permian Petroleum Company v. Petroleos Mexicanos Permian Petroleum Company (1991)

8 federal appellate · 5 state decisions

2501989199020002010decided

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. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Grayned v. City of Rockford · Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc. · Connally v. General Construction Co. · Hague v. Committee for Industrial Organization

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

  1. “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.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “We thus are unable to disagree with the [trial] court's conclusion that the terms of the [ban] are not so indefinite that men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Condemned to the use of words, we can never expect mathematical certainty from our language. The words of the [ban] are marked by "flexibility and reasonable breadth, rather than meticulous specificity,”
    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.