Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 125 FRD 503 - DeGidio v. Pung

DeGidio v. Pung’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
May 2013
most recently cited

2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently May 2013

2 district ·

501989199020002010decided

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 Evans, Inc. v. Tiffany & Co. · Clark v. Brewer · Cross v. Pasley · 450 F. Supp. 308 - Davis v. Mathews · 439 F. Supp. 12 - Hines v. Anderson

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

  1. “Defendants move for amended and supplemental findings pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 52(b). They request 78 specific amendments. In issuing its findings and conclusions the court undertook a careful evaluation of the trial testimony and other evidence. The court need not make findings on all disputed facts. Rather; the findings should provide a, reviewing court a clear understanding of the basis for the trial court’s decision and the grounds on which it was reached. See, e.g., Cross v. Pasley, 267 F.2d 824, 826 (8th Cir.1959); see generally 9 Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil § 2579. The finding and conclusions are very thorough and more than adequate in that regard. Defendants’ proposed amendments and supplements attempt a wholesale revision of the findings and conclusions to make them more favorable to defendants. That is not a proper basis for a Rule 52 motion.”
    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.