Westcott v. Crinklaw’s Empirical Analysis
133 F.3d 658 · 1998
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently April 2023 · most notably Cross v. Cleaver (1998), Atkins v. New York City (1998)
12 federal appellate · 1 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 Carey v. Piphus · Palmer v. Hoffman · Bell v. City of Milwaukee · Westcott v. City of Omaha · Berry v. City of Muskogee
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[e]ven tendering an alternative instruction without objecting to some specific error in the trial court's charge or explaining why the proffered instruction more accurately states the law does not preserve the error for appeal.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[Rule 51] requires specific objections before the jury retires so that the district court may correct errors and avoid the need for a new trial.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'[o]bjections must "bring into focus the precise nature of the alleged error.”
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.