Salveson v. Douglas County’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably Affordable Erecting, Inc. v. Neosho Trompler, Inc. (2006), State v. Miller (2004)
2 federal appellate · 31 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1981A · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson · Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody · Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co. · Ford Motor Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission · Sharon Pollard v. E I Pont Nemours & Company
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the later position must be clearly inconsistent with the earlier position; (2) the facts at issue should be the same in both cases; and (3) the party to be estopped must have convinced the first court to adopt its position.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“[t]he purpose of judicial estoppel is to preserve the integrity of the judicial system and prevent litigants from playing 'fast and loose' with the courts.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Judicial estoppel precludes a party from asserting one position in a legal proceeding and then subsequently asserting an inconsistent position.”
2 later decisions 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.