In the Matter of the Application of Deiulemar Compagnia Di Navigazione Spa for the Perpetuation of Certain Evidence v. M/v Allegra’s Empirical Analysis
198 F.3d 473 · 1999
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently January 2025
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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 Dresser Industries, Inc. v. United States · Ash v. Cort · Martin v. Reynolds Metals Corp. · Comsat Corporation v. National Science Foundation, and National Science Foundation Document Custodian Robert J. Dickman Hugh Van Horn, Comsat Corporation v. National Science Foundation National Science Foundation Document Custodian Robert J. Dickman Hugh Van Horn · Champ v. Siegel Trading Co.
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Depositions Before Action or Pending Appeal. (a) Before Action. (1) Petition. A person who desires to perpetuate his or her own testimony or that of another person regarding any matter that may be cognizable in any court of this state may file a petition verified by affidavit of the petitioner or his or her attorney in the district court of the residence of any expected adverse party. The petition shall be entitled in the name of the petitioner and shall show: (i) The petitioner expects to be a party to an action cognizable in a court of this state but is presently unable to bring it or cause it to be brought; (ii) the subject matter of the expected action and his or her interest therein; (iii) the facts which he or she desires to establish by the proposed testimony and his or her reasons for desiring to perpetuate it; (iv) the names or a description of the persons he or she expects will be adverse parties and their addresses so far as known; and (v) the names and addresses of the persons to be examined and the substance of the testimony which he or she expects to elicit from each, and shall ask for an order authorizing the petitioner to take the depositions of the persons to be examined named in the petition, for the purpose of perpetuating their testimony. (2) Notice and Service. The petitioner shall thereafter serve a notice upon each person named in the petition as an expected adverse party, together with a copy of the petition, stating that the petitioner will apply to t”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gernstein v. Lake
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.