9 F. Supp. 3d 12 - Davis v. Grimes’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman · Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co. · Bennett v. Spear
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Standing is a threshold question in every case; ‘[i]f a party lacks standing to bring a matter before the court, the court lacks jurisdiction to decide the merits of the underlying case.’ To satisfy the case-or-controversy requirement of Article III of the United States Constitution, plaintiffs bear the burden of establishing that they (1) have suffered an ‘injury-in-fact,’ (2) that the injury is ‘‘fairly traceable’ to the actions-of the defendant,’ and (3) that the injury will likely be redressed by a favorable decision. These elements must be proved ‘with the manner and degree of evidence required at the successive stages of the litigation.’ An ‘injury-in-fact’ ‘is defined as ‘an invasion of a legally protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized; and (b) actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical.’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“appear to fall under either the first or second step of the analysis performed by the other circuits.”
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.