Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 106 F.2d 979 - Hedges v. Bushnell

Hedges v. Bushnell’s Empirical Analysis

106 F.2d 979 · 1939

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
July 2017
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently July 2017 · most notably Burchett v. Myers (1953), In re Sandow (1945)

22 federal appellate · 2 district ·

120193919401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 In re Underhill · Willoughby v. Jamison · International Shoe Co. v. Lewine · Third Nat. Bank v. Schatten · Karger v. Sandler

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

  1. ““... Records need not be so complete that they state in detail all or substantially all of the transactions taking place in the course of the business. It is enough if they sufficiently identify the transactions that intelligent inquiry can be made respecting them.” Hedges v. Bushnell, 106 F.2d 979, 982 (10th Cir. 1939).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “to have been justified under all the circumstances of the case”
    1 later decision 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.