Gonzalez v. Banco Central Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
27 F.3d 751 · 1994
Citation profile
43 federal appellate · 50 district · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 146 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably Massachusetts School of Law at Andover, Inc. v. American Bar Ass'n (1998), Perez v. Volvo Car Corp. (2001)
43 federal appellate · 50 district · 13 state decisions
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 15 U.S.C. § 1703 · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Relies on Allen v. McCurry · Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore · Link v. Wabash Railroad · Montana v. United States · Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois Foundation
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 146 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) a final judgment on the merits in an earlier suit, (2) sufficient identicality between the causes of action asserted in the earlier and later suits, and (3) sufficient identicality between the parties in the two suits.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Foss v. Marvic · Hicks v. Redd“[v]irtual representation demands the existence of an express or implied legal relationship in which parties to the first suit are accountable to non-parties who file a subsequent suit raising identical issues.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties or their privies from relitigating issues that were or could have been raised in that action.”
3 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.