Scott v. Cingular Wireless’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently July 2020 · most notably Tillman v. Commercial Credit Loans, Inc. (2008), McKee v. AT & T CORP. (2008)
4 federal appellate · 27 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
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1601 (§ 102 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1666 (§ 161 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1693 · 9 U.S.C. § 2
Relies on Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · Mitsubishi Motors Corporation v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth Inc Soler Chrysler-Plymouth Inc · Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co. · Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp. · Volt Information Sciences Inc v. Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he interests of justice require that in a doubtful case ... any error, if there is to be one, should be committed in favor of allowing the class action.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Individual actions by each of the defrauded consumers [are] often impracticable because the amount of individual recovery would be insufficient to justify bringing a separate action; thus an unscrupulous seller retains the benefits of its wrongful conduct. A class action by consumers produces several salutary byproducts, including a therapeutic effect upon those sellers who indulge in fraudulent practices, aid to legitimate business enterprises by curtailing illegitimate competition, and avoidance to the judicial process of the burden of multiple litigation involving identical claims. The benefit to the parties and the courts would, in many circumstances, be substantial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[a] written provision in any maritime transaction or a contract evidencing a transaction involving commerce to settle by arbitration a controversy thereafter arising out of such contract or transaction, or the refusal to perform the whole or any part thereof, or an agreement in writing to submit to arbitration an existing controversy arising out of such a contract, transaction, or refusal, shall be valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.