Boggs v. Divested Atomic Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 6 district · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 67 later decisions — most recently August 2025 · most notably In re American Medical Systems, Inc. (1996), 34 Cal. 4th 319 - Sav-On Drug Stores, Inc. v. Superior Court (2004)
2 federal appellate · 6 district · 20 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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 General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon · Califano v. Yamasaki · General Telephone Co. of the Northwest, Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission · Gulf Oil Co. v. Bernard · Arkansas Public Service Commission v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.
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 67 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[D]ifferences in the situation of each plaintiff or each class member do not necessarily defeat typicality. The harm suffered by the named plaintiffs may differ in degree from that suffered by other members of the class so long as the harm suffered is of the same type.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Clearly, people and parcels of real property, like snowflakes, necessarily have different and unique characteristics. The important question is to what extent those differences, when compared to the nature and extent of the shared characteristics of the named plaintiffs’ and the class members’ claims, will defeat the Court’s ability to achieve a considerable efficiency through collective adjudication of those claims. Here, as in Sterling [v. Velsicol Chemical Corp., 855 F.2d 1188 (6th Cir.1988)], notwithstanding the differences, class treatment is clearly a better way to proceed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Day v. NLO, Inc.“all persons living within a six mile radius of the boundaries of the . . . Plant whose persons or property [were] exposed to radioactive or hazardous wastes released from the plant.”
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.