Kim v. Kimm’s Empirical Analysis
884 F.3d 98 · 2018
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1691 · 18 U.S.C. § 1692 · 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1927
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Sedima Sprl v. Imrex Company Inc · Chambers v. Time Warner, Inc. · ATSI Communications, Inc. v. Shaar Fund, Ltd.
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim for relief that is plausible on its face.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“To impose sanctions under [ § 1927 ], a court must find clear evidence that (1) the offending party's claims were entirely without color, and (2) the claims were brought in bad faith-that is, motivated by improper purposes such as harassment or delay.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that [a] court should grant leave to amend 'freely ... when justice so requires.'”
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.