Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 191 F.2d 197 - Steccone v. Morse-Starrett Products Co.

Steccone v. Morse-Starrett Products Co.’s Empirical Analysis

191 F.2d 197 · 1951

Citation profile

75
cited by 75 later decisions
3
states following
January 2022
most recently cited

60 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently January 2022 · most notably Slimick v. Silva (1990), Irish v. United States (1955)

60 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

35019511960197019801990200020102020decided

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. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1651

Relies on Kelley v. Everglades Drainage District · Mayo v. Lakeland Highlands Canning Co. · Bostwick v. Brinkerhoff · Hurwitz v. Hurwitz · Ex parte Newman

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

  1. “However, we feel that under the particular facts of this case, and the matter being only one of form, we may properly treat this appeal as though it were a petition for a writ of mandamus. This court has power to issue the writ in aid of its appellate jurisdiction. While it is true that the writ is an extraordinary remedy to be applied with caution we are of the opinion that sufficient grounds exist here to issue the writ if it clearly appears that the district court was in error.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Such an absence of findings would at most stamp the judgment as erroneous, not void, and a determination of its correctness, if sought, would be obtained by appeal. The absence of requisite findings of fact is not such a jurisdictional defect as would prevent an appeal.”
    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.