Mordechai Gurary v. Isaac Winehouse Isaac Winehouse & Nu-Tech Bio-Med Inc’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions

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

1. “ha[ve] broad discretion in determining whether to grant leave to amend,”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Charter Commc'ns, Inc. v. Local Union No. 3, Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers · Shaw v. Empire Stock Transfer Inc.

2. “(b) REPRESENTATIONS TO COURT. By presenting to the court (whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating) a pleading, written motion, or other paper, an attorney or unrepresented party is certifying that to the best of the person’s knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances,— (1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation; (2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law; (3) the allegations and other factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; ....”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Burns v. George Basilikas Trust · 144 F. Supp. 2d 663 - Valdez v. Kreso, Inc.

3. “... the court shall adopt a presumption that the appropriate sanction— (i) ... (ii) for substantial failure of any complaint to comply with any requirement of Rule 11(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is an award to the opposing party of the reasonable attorneys’ fees and other expenses incurred in the action. (B) Rebuttal Evidence. The presumption described in subparagraph (A) may be rebutted only upon proof by the party or attorney against whom sanctions are to be imposed that— (i) the award of attorneys’ fees and other expenses will impose an unreasonable burden on that party or attorney and would be unjust, and the failure to make such an award would not impose a greater burden on the party in whose favor sanctions are to be imposed; or (ii) the violation of Rule 11(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure was de minimis. (C) Sanctions. — If the party or attorney against whom sanctions are to be imposed meets its burden under subpara-graph (B), the court shall award the sanctions that the court deems appropriate pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 153 F. Supp. 2d 489 - Gurary v. Winehouse