Schweizer v. Trans Union Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
136 F.3d 233 · 1998
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently October 2019 · most notably Caridad v. Metro-North Commuter Railroad (1999), Gallagher v. Delaney (1998)
6 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 Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin · Clomon v. Jackson · Russell v. Equifax A.R.S. · Bentley v. Great Lakes Collection Bureau
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(5) The threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken____ (10) The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer....”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]here is nothing in Rule 23 which precludes the court from examining the merits of fhe.plaintiffs claims on a proper Rule 12 motion to dismiss or Rule 56 motion for summary judgment simply because such a motion precedes resolution of the issue of class certification.” Schweizer v. Trans Union Corp., 136 F.3d 233, 238 (2d Cir.1998) (internal quotation omitted). 12 . By contrast, the issue of waiver of arbitration is decided under federal law since”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““In this instance, we agree with the district court that the question of deceptiveness is appropriate for summary judgment. [W]e are not convinced that even the least sophisticated debtor would mistake an ordinary sheet of paper, even with language like “Priority-Gram” and “Important Notice” printed on it, for a telegram.” Id. at 238 .”
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.