Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 294 F.3d 244 - Howard v. Antilla

Howard v. Antilla’s Empirical Analysis

294 F.3d 244 · 2002

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
4
states following
September 2024
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 6 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably Wilson v. City of Boston (2005), Function Media, L.L.C v. Google Inc. (2013)

15 federal appellate · 6 district · 5 state decisions

130200220102020decided

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 New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc. · St. Amant v. Thompson · Garrison v. State of Louisiana · Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co.

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

  1. “demonstrating 'an extreme departure from professional standards.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “evaluating the truth or falsity of any party's account”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[To] allow a new trial after the objecting party failed to seek a proper remedy at the only possible time would undermine the incentives for efficient trial procedure and would allow the possible misuse of [the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] ... to implant a ground for appeal should the jury’s opinion prove distasteful.”
    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.