Meyercheck v. Givens’s Empirical Analysis
180 F.2d 221 · 1950
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently October 1995 · most notably Leimer v. Woods (1952), Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad v. W. E. Williams, Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. (1957)
24 federal appellate · 1 district · 7 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 Porter v. Warner Holding Co. · Adler v. Northern Hotel Co. · Woods v. Richman · Co-Efficient Foundation, Inc. v. Woods
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Section 1895. — Recovery of damages “Any person who demands, accepts, or receives any payment of rent in excess of the maximum rent prescribed under Section 204 [Section 1894 of this Appendix] shall be liable to the person from whom he demands, accepts, or receives such payment (or shall be liable to the United States as hereinafter provided), for reasonable attorney’s fees and costs as determined by the court, plus liquidated damages in the amount of (1) $50, or (2) three times the amount by which the payment or payments demanded, accepted, or received exceed the maximum rent which could lawfully be demanded, accepted, or received, whichever in either case may be the greater amount: Provided, That the amount of such liquidated damages shall be the amount of the overcharge or overcharges if the defendant proves that the violation was neither willful nor the result of failure to take practicable precautions against the occurrence of the violation. Suit to recover such amount may be brought in any Federal, State, or Territorial court. of competent jurisdiction within one year after the date of such violation: . . .””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Plaintiffs, eleven tenants, brought a joint action in a two-count complaint * * * to recover separate damages against the defendant for alleged wilful rent overcharges, together with reasonable attorney fees, * ■ * *. “Defendant’s contention relative to misjoinder of parties may also be disposed of in short order. A reading of Rule 20(a) and (b) * * makes it plain that a wide discretion is vested in the trial court relative to the joinder of parties, * *. More than that, it is not discernible how the asserted misjoinder was prejudicial to the defendant.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Misjoinder of parties is not ground for dismissal of an action. Parties may be dropped or added by order of the court on motion of any party or of its own initiative at any stage of the action and on such terms as are just. * * *”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.