Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 212 F.2d 378 - Chicago, R. I. & P. R. v. Igoe

Chicago, R. I. & P. R. v. Igoe’s Empirical Analysis

212 F.2d 378 · 1954

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
3
states following
November 2018
most recently cited

30 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2018 · most notably Norwood v. Kirkpatrick (1955), Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railroad v. Igoe (1955)

30 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions

1901954196019701980199020002010decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1404 · 28 U.S.C. § 1406 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447 · 28 U.S.C. § 81

Relies on Gulf Oil Corporation v. Gilbert · Roche v. Evaporated Milk Ass'n · Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. Holland · Collett Kitpatrick v. Texas and Pacific Railway Co · Freeman v. Bee Machine 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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “Ultimate decision on that motion is within the province of the District Court, and we cannot, as petitioner would have us do, usurp its function and decide the question in this court.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. ““The relative ease of access to sources of proof; availability of compulsory process for attendance of unwilling, and the cost of obtaining attendance of willing, witnesses; possibility of a view of the premises, if (necessary); and all other practical problems that make trial of a case easy, expeditious and inexpensive. * * * The court will weigh relative advantages and obstacles to fair trial.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.