Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 269 F.2d 54 - McDonnell v. Timmerman

McDonnell v. Timmerman’s Empirical Analysis

269 F.2d 54 · 1959

Citation profile

61
cited by 61 later decisions
3
states following
April 2018
most recently cited

50 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently April 2018 · most notably Solomon Dehydrating Company, Incorporated v. Clarence R. Guyton, Central Greyhound Lines, Incorporated, and the Greyhound Corporation (1961), E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Berkley & Co. (1980)

50 federal appellate · 6 state decisions

3801959196019701980199020002010decided

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 Illinois ex rel. Kennedy v. Hurley · Jackson v. King · Chicago Great Western Railway Company v. Walter R. Casura and Swift & Company, Swift & Company v. Walter R. Casura and Chicago Great Western Railway Company · Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. Epperson

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

  1. “submitted to the jury without an accompanying instruction explaining the legal standards which they are to apply”
    2 later decisions 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.