Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 21 F.3d 1157 - Boodoo v. Cary

Boodoo v. Cary’s Empirical Analysis

21 F.3d 1157 · 1994

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
June 2018
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 14 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably United States Yesudian v. Howard University (1998), Daskalea v. District of Columbia (2000)

13 federal appellate · 14 district ·

130199420002010decided

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 Herrmann v. United States · Martinez-Villareal v. Arizona · Richardson ex rel. Richardson v. Richardson-Merrell, Inc. · Coburn v. Pan American World Airways, Inc. · Robertson v. California

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

  1. “intrudes upon the rightful province of the jury, it is highly disfavored.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Lewis v. Dist. of Columbia · Saunders v. McMahon
  2. “[I]ntru[sion] upon the rightful province of the jury . . . is highly disfavored. We have repeatedly emphasized that `[t]he jury's verdict must stand unless the evidence, together with all inferences that can reasonably be drawn therefrom is so one-sided that reasonable [people] could not disagree on the verdict.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Frank Sears v. Capitol Hill Management Corporation · Lewis v. Dist. of Columbia
  3. “is limited to evaluating whether [the plaintiff] proffered sufficient evidence upon which a jury could properly base a verdict”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Frank Sears v. Capitol Hill Management Corporation · Lewis v. Dist. of Columbia

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.