Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 134 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Wierman v. Casey's General Stores.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Wierman v. Casey's General Stores Anchor | green | “only disputes over facts that might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law will properly preclude the entry of summary judgment.” | 45 |
| 2 | Williams v. City of St. Louis | green | “while the materiality determination rests on the substantive law, it is the substantive law's identification of which facts are critical and which facts are irrelevant that governs.” | 40 |
| 3 | Faibisch v. University Of Minnesota | green | “judgment on the pleadings is appropriate where no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” | 20 |
| 4 | Faibisch v. University Of Minnesota | green | “accepts as true all facts pleaded by the non-moving party and grants all reasonable inferences from the pleadings in favor of the non-moving party.” | 9 |
| 5 | Wishnatsky v. Rovner | green | “when evaluating a motion for judgment on the pleadings, a court must accept as true all factual allegations set out in the complaint, and must construe the complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, drawing all inferences in his favor.” | 8 |
| 6 | Williams v. City of Carl Junction, Missouri | green | “the nonmoving party is entitled to all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from the evidence but not to inferences that may only be drawn by resorting to speculation.” | 5 |
| 7 | Williams v. City of St. Louis | green | “there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” | 4 |
| 8 | St. Jude Medical, Inc. v. Lifecare International, Inc. | green | “the burden on the moving party may be discharged by 'showing' - that is, pointing out to the district court - that there is an absence of evidence to support the nonmoving party's case.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.