Doyle v. Loring’s Empirical Analysis
107 F.2d 337 · 1939
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently September 1994
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions
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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 112 · 28 U.S.C. § 41
Relies on Waterman v. Canal-Louisiana Bank & Trust Co. · Seaboard Rice Milling Co. v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. · Memphis St. Ry. Co. v. Bobo · Interstate Refineries, Inc. v. Barry · Toledo, St. L. & W. R. v. Perenchio
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““. . . We are not required to enter into a detailed discussion of the rules. The Rules of Civil Procedure became effective while the suit was pending and whether they should have been applied was in the discretion of the court (Rule 86).” 107 F.2d at 340 .”
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.