Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 150 F.2d 687 - Butler v. Denton

Butler v. Denton’s Empirical Analysis

150 F.2d 687 · 1945

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
5
states following
April 1991
most recently cited

25 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently April 1991 · most notably Harvey Aluminum, Inc. v. American Cyanamid Co. (1953), Kilpatrick v. Texas & P. Ry. Co. (1948)

25 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 state decisions

180194519501960197019801990decided

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 Caesar v. Burgess · United States v. Fixico · Walker v. Spencer · District of Columbia v. Vignau · Kelly v. Scott

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

  1. ““The purpose and function of construing doubtful provisions in a judgment is to bring out and give effect to that which is already latently in the judgment.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““ *' *. Still, it was merely averred in the motion that, after securing necessary information, plaintiff did not have time to secure the depositions. That was only a conclusion of the pleader, not an allegation of facts showing the exercise of reasonable diligence in the premises. “Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) (1), 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c, provides two methods by which a plaintiff may dismiss his action, but neither of them has application here. Paragraph (a) (2) provides that, except as provided in paragraph (a) (1), an action shall not be dismissed at the instance of plaintiff except upon order of the court and upon such terms and conditions as the court deems proper. That provision manifestly vests in the trial court a reasonable discretion in fixing the terms and conditions upon which a cause shall be dismissed. Here plaintiff sought to dismiss without prejudice. But in view of the time the case had been pending, in view of the failure of plaintiff to appear at the time and place fixed for the first pretrial conference, in view of the emphatic notice given plaintiff at the time of the pretrial conference that the case would be disposed of on February 3 and that it would not be dismissed, in view of the absence of any averment of facts constituting the exercise of reasonable diligence in the preparation of the case for trial after the holding of the pretrial conference, and in view of all the preceding and attending circumstances, it cannot be said that the cou”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “upon such terms and conditions as the court deems proper.”
    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.