Williams v. WMX Technologies, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
112 F.3d 175 · 1997
Citation profile
34 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 226 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Lawrence Greebel Richard Crane Brian Robinson John Ann Somers v. Ftp Software Inc (1999), Bryant v. Avado Brands, Inc. (1999)
34 federal appellate · 4 district ·
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 Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. Gilbertson · Pauley v. Beth-Energy Mines, Inc. · DiLeo v. Ernst & Young · Mills v. Polar Molecular Corp. · Pauley v. Beth-Energy Mines, Inc.
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 226 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`specify the statements contended to be fraudulent, identify the speaker, state when and where the statements were made, and explain why the statements were fraudulent.'”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'time, place and contents of the false representations, as well as the identity of the person making the misrepresentation and what [that person] obtained thereby.'”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[d]irectly put, the who, what, when, and where must be laid out before access to the discovery process is granted.”
5 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.