Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 163 F.2d 940 - Clark v. Taylor

Clark v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis

163 F.2d 940 · 1947

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
December 2016
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 2 district · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 45 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2016 · most notably Dickinson v. Petroleum Conversion Corp. (1950), Debt v. Wyer (1959)

22 federal appellate · 2 district · 10 state decisions

19019471950196019701980199020002010decided

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 12 U.S.C. § 95A

Relies on Catlin v. United States · Cobbledick v. United States · Hurn v. Oursler · Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad · United States v. Dickinson

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

  1. “The theory adopted in the new rules * * * has been that the `transaction' or `occurrence' is the subject matter of a claim, rather than the legal rights arising therefrom; additions to or subtractions from the central core of fact do not change this substantial identity * * *.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The first doctrine * * * in order to `protect from delay the progress of the trial,' bars an appeal from an order, made in the course of a suit not yet concluded, when the appeal will lead to `the piecemeal disposition of what for practical purposes is a single controversy,' and will result in `separate reviews of the component elements in a unified cause.' The second doctrine * * * again in order to discourage delays, permits an immediate appeal from an order dismissing one of two distinct claims `arising out of wholly separate and distinct transactions.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the Rule is intended to make decisive the district judge's determination of finality only if the right of appeal would have been doubtful before the Rule went into operation.”
    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.