Wendt v. Leonard’s Empirical Analysis
431 F.3d 410 · 2005
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably Southern Walk at Broadlands Homeowner's Ass'n v. OpenBand at Broadlands, LLC (2013), United States v. Hartwell (2006)
9 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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. § 1341 · 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on Nemaizer v. Baker · Lubben v. Selective Service System Local Board No. 27 · Compton v. Alton Steamship Co. · Keene Corporation v. Je Cass 622 · Eberhardt v. Integrated Design & Construction, Inc.
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.
“An order is “void” for purposes of [Civil] Rule 60(b)(4) ... if the court rendering the decision lacked ... subject matter jurisdiction.... Despite this seemingly broad statement, we narrowly construe the concept of a “void” order under [Civil] Rule 60(b)(4) precisely because of the threat to finality of judgments and the risk that litigants ... will use [Civil] Rule 60(b)(4) to circumvent an appeal process they elected not to follow. In other words, a lack of subject matter jurisdiction will not always render a final judgment void [under Civil Rule 60(b)(4) ]. Only when the jurisdictional error is egregious will courts treat the judgment as void. Thus, when deciding whether an order is “void” under [Civil] Rule 60(b)(4) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, courts must look for the rare instance of a clear usurpation of power. A court plainly usurps jurisdiction only when there is a total want of jurisdiction and [there is] no arguable basis on which it could have rested a finding that it had jurisdiction.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“judgment can be voided on two grounds: (1) if the rendering court lacked subject matter jurisdiction or (2) if it acted in a manner inconsistent with due process of law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“necessary for an award of attorney fees under 1988. J.A. 153. The district court explained that, although Wendt proceeded pro se, he was”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Wendt v. Leonard
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.