Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 29 F.3d 863 - Adams

Adams’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

59
cited by 59 later decisions
1
states following
June 2022
most recently cited

14 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently June 2022 · most notably Marriage of McMahon v. McMahon (2004), Derzack v. County of Allegheny (1996)

14 district · 1 state decisions

3601990200020102020decided

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 Singleton v. Wulff · Link v. Wabash Railroad · National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, Inc. · Concrete Pipe & Products of Cal., Inc. v. Construction Laborers Pension Trust for Southern Cal. · Boatmen's National Bank of St. Louis v. Carver

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

  1. “(1) the extent of the party’s personal responsibility; (2) the prejudice to the adversary caused by the failure to meet scheduling orders and respond to discovery; (3) a history of dilatoriness; (4) whether the conduct of the party or the attorney was willful or in bad faith; (5) the effectiveness of sanctions other than dismissal, which entails an analysis of alternative sanctions; and (6) the meritoriousness of the claim or defense.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “While we defer to the discretion of the district court, we are mindful that dismissal with prejudice is only appropriate in limited circumstances: “Because [an order of dismissal] deprives a party of its day in court, our precedent requires that we carefully review each such case to ascertain whether the district court abused its discretion in applying such an extreme sanction,” ..., and in this review “doubts should be resolved in favor of reaching a decision on the merits[.]””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[w]here . . . a party is personally responsible for [misconduct], the effect of dismissal on third parties cannot be dispositive.”
    1 later decision 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.