Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 188 F.2d 537 - Nicol v. Koscinski

Nicol v. Koscinski’s Empirical Analysis

188 F.2d 537 · 1951

Citation profile

81
cited by 81 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
December 2015
most recently cited

32 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 81 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2015 · most notably Norwood v. Kirkpatrick (1955), All States Freight, Inc. v. Modarelli (1952)

32 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

4001951196019701980199020002010decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1404

Relies on Gulf Oil Corporation v. Gilbert · Ford Motor Co. v. Ryan

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

  1. ““ * * * [W]hether the order stands or is set aside, one of the litigants will be inconvenienced, and it became the duty of the district judge to balance inconveniences and to determine upon which litigant the greater hardship would rest, if he granted change of venue, and that determination was subject to the rule that unless the balance is strongly in favor of the defendant the plaintiff’s choice of forum should rarely be disturbed.” Nicol v. Koseinski, 188 F.2d 537 , (6th Cir. 1951)'.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Important considerations are the relative ease of access to sources of proof; availability of compulsory process for attendance of unwilling, and the cost of obtaining attendance of willing witnesses; possibility of view of premises, if view would be appropriate to the action; and all other practical problems that make trial of a case easy, expeditious and inexpensive * * * There is an appropriateness, too, in having the trial of a diversity case in a forum that is at home with the state law that must govern the case, rather than having a court in some other forum untangle problems in conflict of laws, and in law foreign to itself.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Determination as to the greater convenience or inconvenience must rest within the sound judicial discretion of the district judge to whom the petition for change of venue is addressed, and his decision should not be set aside unless there is apparent an abuse of discretion.”
    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.