Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 206 F.3d 874 - Maria Teresa De Sarachoeureka Canners Group Sa Eureka Mexicana v. Custom Food Machinery Inc McNeil Sr Fred Avalli Doe Doe

Maria Teresa De Sarachoeureka Canners Group Sa Eureka Mexicana v. Custom Food Machinery Inc McNeil Sr Fred Avalli Doe Doe’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
1
states following
April 2022
most recently cited

8 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently April 2022 · most notably Jinro America Inc Washington Corporation, United Student Funds, Inc. v. Wylie (In Re Wylie) (2006)

8 district · 1 state decisions

320200020102020decided

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 General Electric Co. v. Joiner · Browning-Ferris Industries of Vermont, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc. · United States v. Hays · Alaska v. United States · McGlinchy v. Shell Chemical 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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “To prevail, the moving party must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the verdict was obtained through fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct and the conduct complained of prevented the losing party from fully and fairly presenting the defense.” De Saracho v. Custom Food Mach., Inc., 206 F.3d 874 , 880 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 876 , 121 S.Ct. 183 , 148 L.Ed.2d 126 (2000) (internal citations omitted). Under subsection (6) of Rule 60(b), the court may order relief for”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “fraud ..., misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party.”
    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.