Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 191 F.2d 532 - Palmer v. Chamberlin

Palmer v. Chamberlin’s Empirical Analysis

191 F.2d 532 · 1951

Citation profile

148
cited by 148 later decisions
14
states following
November 2018
most recently cited

84 federal appellate · 6 district · 27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 148 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably Kessing v. National Mortgage Corporation (1971), Bonham v. Dresser Industries, Inc. (1977)

84 federal appellate · 6 district · 27 state decisions — followed in 14 states

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

Relies on Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co. · Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation · United States v. Trenton Potteries Co. · Bank of Augusta v. Earle · Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York v. Elize Maud Hill E C

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

  1. “"Where ... the decision of a question of law by the Court depends upon an inquiry into the surrounding facts and circumstances, the Court should refuse to grant a motion for a summary judgment until the facts and circumstances have been sufficiently developed to enable the Court to be reasonably certain that it is making a correct determination of the question of law.” Id. at 540 .”
    13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““It is well-settled that the party moving for summary judgment has the burden of demonstrating that the Rule. 56(c) test — ‘no genuine issue as to any material fact’ — is satisfied and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The movant is held to a stringent standard. Before summary judgment will be granted it must be clear what the truth is and any doubt as to the existence of a genuine issue of material fact will be resolved against the movant. Because the burden is on the movant, the evidence presented to the court always is construed in favor of the party opposing the motion .... ” (Footnotes omitted.)”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““If after investigation, it appears that the parties have indicated, either expressly or tacitly, that their rights and obligations should be governed by the laws of the place of performance then the court should not hesitate to apply the law to the ease.” McKane v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co., 199 So. 175, 182 (La.App.Orl.1940), quoted in Palmer v. Chamberlin, 191 F.2d 532, 536 (5th Cir. 1951).”
    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.