Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 344 F.2d 222 - Wojton v. Marks

Wojton v. Marks’s Empirical Analysis

344 F.2d 222 · 1965

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
3
states following
July 2010
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently July 2010 · most notably Kagan v. Caterpillar Tractor Co. (1986), West v. Keve W (1983)

19 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

130196519701980199020002010decided

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 Ackermann v. United States · Wagner v. United States · William R. Russell v. William Cunningham, William R. Russell and Anna L. Russell v. United States of America · Leong v. Railroad Transfer Service, Inc.

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

  1. ““On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or his legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence, which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b); (3) fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; or (6) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment. The motion shall be made within a reasonable time, and for reasons (1), (2), and (3) not more than one year after the judgment, order, or proceeding was entered or taken.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.