Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 412 F.3d 598 - Jethroe v. Omnova Solutions, Inc.

Jethroe v. Omnova Solutions, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

412 F.3d 598 · 2005

Citation profile

97
cited by 97 later decisions
10
states following
August 2020
most recently cited

25 federal appellate · 4 district · 20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 97 later decisions — most recently August 2020 · most notably Eastman v. Union Pacific Railroad (2007), Kane v. National Union Fire Insurance (2008)

25 federal appellate · 4 district · 20 state decisions — followed in 10 states

540200520102020decided

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 Koon v. United States · Great Plains Trust Company v. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co · Ryan Operations Gp Nvr Lp Nvr v. Santiam-Midwest Lumber Co Bright Wood Corp · Burnes III v. Pemco Aeroplex Inc · Browning Manufacturing v. Mims

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.

  1. “Because a court, by definition, abuses its discretion when it makes an error of law, an appellate court may correct such mistakes.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[j]udicial estoppel is particularly appropriate where, as here, a party fails to disclose an asset to a bankruptcy court, but then pursues a claim in a separate tribunal based on that undisclosed asset.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Judicial estoppel has three elements: (1) The party against whom it is sought has asserted a legal position that is plainly inconsistent with a prior position; (2) a court accepted the prior position; and (3) the party did not act inadvertently.”
    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.