Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 345 F.2d 246 - Featherstone v. Barash

Featherstone v. Barash’s Empirical Analysis

345 F.2d 246 · 1965

Citation profile

75
cited by 75 later decisions
5
states following
February 2019
most recently cited

50 federal appellate · 5 district · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably In Re Robert J. Young and Donna M. Young, Debtors. Fowler Brothers v. Robert J. Young and Donna M. Young (1996), Penn v. San Juan Hospital, Inc. (1975)

50 federal appellate · 5 district · 11 state decisions

220196519701980199020002010decided

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 United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Duberstein D Stanton · United States v. El Paso Natural Gas Co. · Goss v. Board of Education · Kelley v. Everglades Drainage District

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

  1. “(a) Effect. In all actions tried upon the facts without a jury ..., the court shall find the facts specially and state separately its conclusions of law thereon, and judgment shall be entered pursuant to Rule 58.... It will be sufficient if the findings of fact and conclusions of law are stated orally and recorded in open court following the close of the evidence or appear in an opinion or memorandum of decision filed by the court.”
    10 later decisions 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.