Flores-Febus v. MVM, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 521 · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Erie Co v. Tompkins · Edwards v. City of Goldsboro · Garside v. Osco Drug, Inc. · Maldonado-Denis v. Castillo-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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]hile the First Circuit Court of Appeals has not ruled specifically on the issue, every other federal appellate court to have considered the question has held that the application of judicial estoppel in diversity cases implicates a 'strong federal policy' warranting reference to federal, rather than state, principles.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“would likely reach this same conclusion even without the parties' acquiescent behavior.”
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.