Neighborhood Development Collaborative v. Murphy’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 5 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 636
Relies on United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · United States v. Kovel · United States v. Jones · National Union Fire Insurance v. Murray Sheet Metal Co. · Harman v. Levin
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“What the Court takes exception to is [the plaintiffs] effort to ... argue, in effect, that a joint representation of Party A and Party B may somehow arise through the expectations of Party B alone, despite Party A’s views to the contrary. This position is untenable, because it would ... allow the mistaken (albeit reasonable) belief by one party that it was represented by an attorney ... to serve to infiltrate the protections and privileges afforded to another client.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] district court owes substantial deference to a magistrate judge in considering a magistrate judge's ruling on a non-dispositive motion”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Stone v. Trump
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.