Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 293 USAPPDC 267 - Whelan v. Abell

Whelan v. Abell’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
October 2011
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Warth v. Seldin · Allen v. McCurry · Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore · Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. Camp · Cruz v. Hauck

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

  1. “must be accomplished. Morowitz, 423 A.2d at 198 (emphasis added). And we have previously determined that an injury markedly similar to the one claimed by the Whelans can support an abuse of process claim. In Neumann v. Vidal, the plaintiff alleged that the defendant had filed a lawsuit and instituted patent proceedings in order to prevent the plaintiff from conducting business. We reversed the district court's dismissal of the plaintiff's abuse of process claim, holding that the jury should decide whether the challenged proceedings”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “element of the tort. 26 We do not believe that our opinion in Yellow Bus Lines, Inc. v. Drivers Local Union 639, 883 F.2d 132 (D.C.Cir.1989) (construing D.C. law), although ostensibly favorable to appellees, requires a different result. That case involved an allegation that a union business director had sued an employer for improper purposes, one of which was to coerce the employer to sign a collective bargaining agreement. We held that to prevail on an abuse of process claim, the employer had to demonstrate”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “We rejected this argument because an exception for unredressed wrongs would obliterate the limitations rule. See id. at 229-30. A decision regarding an employment discharge is a single act that finalizes relations between the parties, while the commencement of a lawsuit is only the first link in a chain of conduct that does not end until the complaining party ceases prosecution of the suit. Cf. Page v. United States, 729 F.2d 818 , 821-22 (D.C.Cir.1984) (”
    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.