How cited: Cluster 766169 · Go Syfert

Cluster 766169 (1999)

green · 45 citation events across 12 courts. Showing the 19 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1999 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
199920122026
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see · 4 citations in this opinion
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 891 (8th Cir.1999).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 893 (8th Cir.1999) (finding no abuse of discretion where party failed to “explain how he would amend the complaint to save the claim”); Wisdom v. First Midwest Bank, of Poplar Bluff, 167 F.3d 402, 409 (8th Cir.1999) (“parties should not be allowed to amend their complaint without showing how the complaint could be amended to save the meritless claim”).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 891 (8th Cir. 1999).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 893 (8th Cir.1999.) (finding no abuse of discretion where party failed to “explain how he would amend the complaint to save the claim”); Wisdom v. First Midwest Bank, of Poplar Bluff, 167 F.3d 402, 409 (8th Cir.1999) (stating “parties should not be allowed to amend their complaint without showing how the complaint could be amended to save the merit-less claim”).
Cited · 2d Cir. · signal: see
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 893 (8th Cir.1999) (“In Brandt’s motion to amend before the district court, and in his argument on appeal, he neglected to explain how he would amend the complaint to save the claim.
Cited · 2d Cir. · signal: see
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 893 (8th Cir.1999) (“In Brandt’s motion to amend before the district court, and in his argument on appeal, he neglected to explain how he would amend the complaint to save the claim.
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 891 (8th Cir.1999).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 891 (8th Cir.1999).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 891 (8th Cir. 1999).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 891 (8th Cir.1999).
green No. 02-3519 (2003)
Cited (see also) · 8th Cir. · signal: see, e.g.
See, e.g., Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 891 (8th Cir.1999) (affirming grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants in an excessive force case because plaintiff failed to submit any evidence contradicting defendants' version of the incident).
Cited (see also) · 8th Cir. · signal: see, e.g.
See, e.g., Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 891 (8th Cir.1999) (affirming grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants in an excessive force case because plaintiff failed to submit any evidence contradicting defendants’ version of the incident).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 893 (8th Cir.1999) (finding no abuse of discretion where party failed "to explain how he would amend the complaint to save the claim").
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 893 (8th Cir.1999) (finding no abuse of discretion where party failed “to explain how he would amend the complaint to save the claim”).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 893 (8th Cir.1999) (finding no abuse of discretion where party failed to "explain how he would amend the complaint to save the claim"); Wisdom v. First Midwest Bank, of Poplar Bluff, 167 F.3d 402, 409 (8th Cir.1999) ("parties should not be allowed to amend their complaint without showing how the complaint could be amended to save the meritless claim"). 90 Under the circumstances presented, we find the abuse of discretion standard is applic…
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 891 (8th Cir. 1999).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 891 (8th Cir.1999).
green Smith v. Kilgore (2017)
Cited (see also) · W.D. Mo. · signal: see also
(See for example the discussion on page 11-12, infra) The Eighth Circuit has repeatedly stated that “in opposing a motion for summary judgment, a nonmoving party may not rely on mere denials or allegations in its pleadings, but must designate specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.” Hernandez v. Jarman, 340 F.3d 617, 622 (8th Cir. 2003); see also Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 891 (8th Cir. 1999) (finding that a party’s failure to “submit even a shre…
finding that a party’s failure to “submit even a shred of evidence” to contradict evidence presented by the movant required the Court to find the facts, as presented by the movant, uncontroverted
green Casciani v. Nesbitt (2009)
Cited · W.D.N.Y. · signal: see
See Brandt v. Davis, 191 F.3d 887 , 893 (8th Cir.1999) (plaintiffs allegation that city failed to enforce zoning laws against her neighbor did not show purposeful discrimination against plaintiff for purposes of equal protection claim).