Gambale v. Deutsche Bank AG’s Empirical Analysis
377 F.3d 133 · 2004
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 7 district · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 97 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Huminski v. Corsones (2004), Mathirampuzha v. Potter (2008)
20 federal appellate · 7 district · 22 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 Nixon v. Warner Communications, Inc. · Press-Enterprise Company v. Superior Court of California for County of Riverside · Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Public Utilities Commission · Marino v. Ortiz · Lewis v. Gober
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 97 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Hjowever confidential it may have been beforehand, subsequent to publication it was confidential no longer. It now resides on the highly accessible databases of Westlaw and Lexis and has apparently been disseminated prominently elsewhere. We simply do not have the power, even were we of the mind to use it if we had, to make what has thus become public private again. The genie is out of the bottle, albeit because of what we consider to be the district court’s error. We have not the means to put the genie back.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“presumptive right to 'public observation' is at its apogee when asserted with respect to documents relating to 'matters that directly affect an adjudication.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Subject to the provisions of Rule 23(e), of Rule 66, and of any statute of the United States, an action may be dismissed by the plaintiff without order of court (i) bv filing a notice of dismissal at any time before service by the adverse party of an answer or of a motion for summary judgment, whichever first occurs, or (ii) bv filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared in the action. Unless otherwise stated in the notice of dismissal or stipulation, the dismissal is without prejudice, except that a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication upon the merits when filed by a plaintiff who has once dismissed in any court of the United States or of any state an action based on or including the same claim.”
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.