Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 935 F.2d 1106 - Hall v. Bellmon

Hall v. Bellmon’s Empirical Analysis

935 F.2d 1106 · 1991

Citation profile

1,801
cited by 1,801 later decisions
8
states following
January 2025
most recently cited

425 federal appellate · 471 district · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 1,801 later decisions — most recently January 2025 · most notably Garrett v. Selby Connor Maddux & Janer (2005), Moore v. United States (1991)

425 federal appellate · 471 district · 10 state decisions

61901991200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Oklahoma Western District Court)

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1915

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Conley v. Gibson · Scheuer v. Rhodes

Cited together with Haines v. Kerner · Conley v. Gibson · Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly

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 1,801 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “A pro se litigant's pleadings are to be construed liberally and held to a less stringent standard than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.”
    90 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “conclusory allegations without supporting factual averments are insufficient to state a claim on which relief can be based.”
    27 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “when it is 'patently obvious' that the plaintiff could not prevail on the facts alleged, and allowing him an opportunity to amend his complaint would be futile.”
    26 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.