Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 403 F.2d 135 - Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Lucey Products Co.

Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Lucey Products Co.’s Empirical Analysis

403 F.2d 135 · 1968

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
2
states following
August 2014
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably Board of Public Instruction v. Finch (1969), ROCHEZ BROTHERS, INC., a Pennsylvania Corporation v. Charles R. RHOADES, Appellant, Et Al. (1975)

19 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

80196819701980199020002010decided

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 Conley v. Gibson · Erie Co v. Tompkins · Hormel v. Helvering · Braunfeld v. Gibbons · Surowitz v. Hilton Hotels Corp.

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. ““In the case at bar, the materials furnished to Gould by Lucey were all delivered prior to July 7, 1965, when Youngstown caused a writ of garnishment to be issued against Texaco. Since it is not disputed that Lucey complied with the filing and notice requirements of Art. 5476a and 5476c, Lucey had a properly perfected lien which related back to a time prior to the issuance of Youngstown’s writ of garnishment. As decided by the Crutcher case, such a lien is prior in time and superior in right to a writ of garnishment issued after the materials are delivered.” Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Lucy Product Co., 403 F.2d 135, 143 (5th Cir.1968).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Orderly rules of procedure do not require sacrifice of the rules of fundamental justice.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Moreau

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.