Partridge’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
35 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably 790 F. Supp. 2d 997 - Surowiec v. Capital Title Agency, Inc. (2011), 41 F. Supp. 3d 783 - Arvizu v. Medtronic Inc. (2014)
35 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 Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Udall v. Tallman · Camp v. Pitts · Forsham v. Harris · Autek Systems Corp. v. United States
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When a party has [had] an adequate opportunity to provide the trial court with evidence and a memorandum of law, there is no prejudice [in a refusal to grant oral argument].” Partridge v. Reich, 141 F.3d 920, 926 (9th Cir.1998) (quoting Lake at Las Vegas Investors Grp., Inc. v. Pac. Malibu Dev. Corp., 933 F.2d 724 , 729 (9th Cir.1991)) (alterations in Partridge ).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In other words, a district court can decide the issue without oral argument if the parties can submit their papers to the court.”
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.