Crowe v. Jp Bolduc’s Empirical Analysis
365 F.3d 86 · 2004
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 15 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently April 2022 · most notably Eulitt v. Maine (2004), Nunez-Reyes v. Holder (2011)
24 federal appellate · 15 district · 6 state decisions
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 Alyeska Pipeline Service Company v. Wilderness Society · Griffith v. Kentucky · Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson · White v. New Hampshire Department of Employment Security · Harper v. Virginia Department of Taxation
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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Ostemeck footnote is purposeful, straightforward, and soundly reasoned. All nine Justices subscribed to it. And, finally, the footnote remains unblemished; it has not been scarred by any subsequent Supreme Court pronouncement. In these circumstances, we are unwilling to turn a blind eye to the clear import of footnote 3”); McCalla v. Royal MacCabees Life Ins. Co., 369 F.3d 1128, 1132 (9th Cir.2004) (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“When a plaintiff obtains a jury verdict in a diversity case in which the substantive law of the forum state supplies the rules of decision, that state's law governs the plaintiff's entitlement to prejudgment interest.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the proper procedural vehicle for motions seeking to revise a judgment to include an initial award of prejudgment interest (whether mandatory or discretionary)”). In Crowe , the court limited its holding to”
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.