Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 44 P.3d 8 - Oda v. State

Oda v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2002

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
4
states following
August 2020
most recently cited

27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently August 2020 · most notably Smith v. Behr Process Corp. (2002), Trujillo v. State (2002)

27 state decisions

150200220102020decided

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 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 707 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States · Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin · General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon · California State Board of Equalization v. Western Marina Corp. · East Texas Motor Freight System, Inc. v. Rodriguez

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

  1. “[o]ne or more members of a class may sue . . . as representative parties on behalf of all only if (1) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable, (2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class, (3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class, and (4) the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “`Going beyond the pleadings is necessary, as a court must understand the claims, defenses, relevant facts, and applicable substantive law in order to make a meaningful determination of the certification issue.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[n]otwithstanding the rule of liberal interpretation, . . . the class action rule does not contemplate automatic affirmance whenever a trial court certifies a class.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.