Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 102 FSUPP 105 - Zellem v. Herring

Zellem v. Herring’s Empirical Analysis

1952

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
June 1972
most recently cited

1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently June 1972

1 district · 1 state decisions

50195219601970decided

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.

Relationships

Relies on Spero-Nelson v. Brown · Frasca v. Howell · United States v. Washington Dehydrated Food Co. · 71 F. Supp. 955 - Caldwell v. Southern Pac. Co. · 25 F. Supp. 325 - Chesevski v. Strawbridge & Clothier

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

  1. ““ * * * under the law, the plaintiff is entitled as of right or according to an established formula, to a minimum of special damages, or (when) the verdict of the jury as to general damages, considering the elements involved, is so inadequate as to shock the conscience of the court, * * * ”, Caldwell v. Southern Pacific Co., 71 F.Supp. 955, 962 (S.D.Calif., 1947), (Emphasis not supplied)”
    2 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.