Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 111 F.2d 406 - Rosenblum v. Dingfelder

Rosenblum v. Dingfelder’s Empirical Analysis

111 F.2d 406 · 1940

Citation profile

63
cited by 63 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
October 2009
most recently cited

31 federal appellate · 4 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 63 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2009 · most notably Sprint Communications Co. v. APCC Services, Inc. (2008), W.R. Huff Asset Management Co. v. Deloitte & Touche LLP (2008)

31 federal appellate · 4 district · 8 state decisions

1801940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Sessions v. Romadka · Brown v. O'Keefe · Titus v. Wallick · Federal Crude Oil Co. v. Yount-Lee Oil Co. · Palmer v. Palmer

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

  1. “* * * when the trustee in bankruptcy abandons an asset, he is to be treated as having never had title to it; the abandonment is said to relate back, so that `the title stands as if no assignment had been made.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Mason v. Commissioner · Barletta v. Tedeschi
  2. “Since the claim is owned and may be sued upon by someone, all a defendant may properly ask is such a party plaintiff as will render the judgment final and res adjudicata of the right sued upon.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Blau v. Lamb
  3. “Relation back may be considered in the nature of a fiction”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. United States v. Grant

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.