Terkildsen v. Waters’s Empirical Analysis
481 F.2d 201 · 1973
Citation profile
57 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently October 2013 · most notably LeSportsac, Inc. v. K Mart Corp. (1985), May Marine Supply Company v. Brunswick Corporation (1981)
57 federal appellate · 1 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 Hormel v. Helvering · United States v. American Ry Express Co Southeastern Express Co · Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association v. S Parnell Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association · Jack Meyers v. The Selznick Company, 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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““... factual questions may have been implicated as to which the judge made no finding because the issue was not directly raised and equally, where consideration underlying a subtle legal issue could have been exposed and distilled by the district court so as to facilitate more informed consideration by [an appellate] court.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“designate the judgment, order or part thereof appealed from,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“considerations underlying [the] subtle legal issue [had not] been exposed and distilled by the able district judge so as to facilitate more informed consideration by this court”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Laza v. Reish
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.