Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 298 F.3d 1077 - In Re Ronald Gary Watts

In Re Ronald Gary Watts’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
July 2024
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably California Pro-Life Council, Inc. v. Getman (2003), 433 F. Supp. 2d 1110 - Burch v. Regents of the University of California (2006)

9 federal appellate · 2 district ·

160200220102020decided

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 Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. · Patterson v. McLean Credit Union · Payne v. Tennessee · Chisom v. Roemer · Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust 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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “absent convincing evidence that the California Supreme Court would reject the interpretation”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In the absence of a pronouncement by the highest court of a state, the federal courts must follow the decision of the intermediate appellate courts of the state unless there is convincing evidence that the highest court of the state would decide differently.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “It is a bedrock principle of our court that the published decision of one three-judge panel binds every other panel, from that day forward. Put another way, one panel may not overrule another; the power to overrule is confided to the en banc court, and the en banc court alone. Panels may distinguish; they may question; they may deploy virtually any of the other verbs in the Shepard's vocabulary. But they may not overrule.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.