Young v. Same.’s Empirical Analysis
159 F.2d 634 · 1947
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently September 1962
8 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
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 Anderson v. Yungkau · International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union v. Donnelly Garment Co. · Home Owners' Loan Corp. v. Huffman · Frank Adam Electric Co. v. Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. · Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Abbott
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““There is no doubt that under Rule 15(a) leave to amend, after the first amendment, is subject to the sound judicial discretion of the trial court and that its ruling on an application for such leave can be reversed only for abuse of that discretion. Frank Adam Electric Co. v. Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co., 8 Cir., 146 F.2d 165, 167 ; Calhoun County v. Roberts, 5 Cir., 148 F.2d 901, 903, 904 ; Ledbetter v. Farmers Bank & Trust Co., 4 Cir., 142 F.2d 147, 149 ; Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Abbott, 4 Cir., 130 F. 2d 40, 44 . And where an appellate court has power to review the exercise of judicial discretion, the inquiry is limited to whether the action is arbitrary in that the court failed to apply the appropriate equitable and legal principles to the established or conceded facts. Home Owners’ Loan Corporation v. Huffman, 8 Cir., 134 F.2d 314, 317 ; Hartford-Empire Co. v. Obear-Nester Glass Co., 8 Cir., 95 F.2d 414, 417 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““A party may amend his pleading once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served or, if the pleading is one to which no responsive pleading is permitted and the action has not been placed upon the trial calendar, he may so amend it at any time within twenty days after it is served. Otherwise a party may amend his pleading only by leave of court or by written consent of the adverse party; and leave shall be freely given when justice so requires. * * * ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Martinez v. Cook
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.