Berbick v. Precinct 42’s Empirical Analysis
2013
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Terry v. Ohio · Rakas v. Illinois · Thomas v. Arn
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.
“compelling justification for [its] failure to present such evidence to the magistrate judge,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[c]ourts generally do not consider new evidence raised in objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Fischer v. Forrest
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.