Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 149 F.2d 398 - Bowles v. Krodel

Bowles v. Krodel’s Empirical Analysis

149 F.2d 398 · 1945

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
3
states following
February 1952
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Bowles v. Glick Bros. Lumber Co. · Bowles v. Montgomery Ward & Co. · Bowles v. Hasting · 59 F. Supp. 759 - Bowles v. Heinel Motors, Inc.

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

  1. ““Rule 56 clearly contemplates a full hearing on the question 'of damages. * * ' * If the court determines that defendant’s violation was-wilful, it need not-necessarily grant treble damages, but it may grant damages in any amount not more than three times the overcharges.' The amount of the damages for a wilful violation under the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942 is a matter within the court’s discretion.” '”
    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.