Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 428 F.3d 1008 - Corsello v. Lincare, Inc.

Corsello v. Lincare, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

428 F.3d 1008 · 2005

Citation profile

135
cited by 135 later decisions
1
states following
December 2024
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 135 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably United States Joshi v. St Luke's Hospital Inc (2006), United States v. McInteer (2006)

5 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions

940200520102020decided

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 United States Clausen v. Laboratory Corporation of America Inc · Harris v. Ivax Corp. · Cooper v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Florida, Inc. · Bryant v. Dupree

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 135 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) that the defendant conspired with at least one person to get a false or fraudulent claim paid by the Government; and (2) that at least one of the conspirators performed an overt act to get a false or fraudulent claim paid.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Although Stepe focuses on her status as an insider of RS Compounding, that status, without more, does not provide sufficient indicia of reliability to satisfy Rule 9(b).”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “allow an amendment (1) where there has been undue delay, bad faith, dilatory motive, or repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed; (2) where allowing amendment would cause undue prejudice to the opposing party; or (3) where amendment would be futile.”
    2 later decisions 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.