Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis
402 F.2d 134 · 1968
Citation profile
34 federal appellate · 3 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently October 2019 · most notably State ex rel. Daggett v. Gessaman (1973), Voegeli v. Lewis (1977)
34 federal appellate · 3 district · 8 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2071 (Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Amendments)
Relies on Hickman v. Taylor · Summa v. Morgan Real Estate Co. · Wilkins v. Allied Stores of Missouri · Douglas v. Douglas
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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“inaccuracies or errors at this stage of the proceeding should not form the basis for setting aside verdicts, unless prejudicial error is shown.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(e) Supplementation of Responses. A party who has responded to a request for discovery with a response that was complete when made is under no duty to supplement his response to include information thereafter acquired, except as follows (2) A party is under a duty seasonably to amend a prior response if he obtains information upon the basis of which (A) he knows that the response was incorrect when made, or (B) he knows that the response though correct when made is no longer true and the circumstances are such that a failure to amend the response is in substance a knowing concealment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The new rules, however, restrict the pleadings to the task of general notice giving and invest the depositiondiscovery process with a vital role in the preparation for trial . . . . The way is now clear, consistent with recognized privileges, for the parties to obtain the fullest possible knowledge of the issues and facts before trial. 4 . . . the deposition-discovery rules should be accorded a broad and liberal treatment. . . . Mutual knowledge of all relevant facts gathered by both parties is essential to proper litigation . . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Anzaldo v. Croes
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.