Fred MOSS, Jr., Appellant, v. the LANE COMPANY, INCORPORATED, Appellee’s Empirical Analysis
471 F.2d 853 · 1973
Citation profile
37 federal appellate · 7 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 70 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2016 · most notably Sosna v. Iowa (1975), Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co. (1976)
37 federal appellate · 7 district · 4 state decisions
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 Jenkins v. United Gas Corp. · Marvin W. BROWN, Appellant, v. GASTON COUNTY DYEING MACHINE COMPANY, Appellee · Hutchings v. United States Industries, Inc. · Cox v. Babcock & Wilcox Co.
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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If the plaintiff were a member of the class at the commencement of the action and his competency as a representative of the class then determined or assumed, the subsequent dismissal or mootness of his individual claim, particularly in a discrimination case, will not operate as a dismissal or render moot the action of the class, or destroy the plaintiff’s right to litigate the issues on behalf of the class.” Moss v. Lane Company, Inc., 471 F.2d 853, 855 (4 Cir. 1973).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“We feel it appropriate to observe, however, that, as we stated in Cox v. Bab-cock and Wilcox Company, 4 Cir., 471 F.2d 13 , the use of advisory juries in discrimination cases is not favored, however broad the language of Rule 39(c) may be deemed, and should be restricted in any event to the exceptional case where there are peculiar and unique circumstances supporting its use.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“simply because it concluded that the mere fact that on the trial of the merits the plaintiff had not sustained his claim denied him the right to represent the class”
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.