H. L. Moore, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross v. J. C. Knowles, Defendants-Appellants-Cross’s Empirical Analysis
482 F.2d 1069 · 1973
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently November 2013 · most notably United States v. O'Neil (1983), Pope v. Intermountain Gas Co. (1982)
15 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 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 Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Perry v. Sindermann · Boddie v. Connecticut · Bell v. Burson · Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee v. McGrath
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Failure to join an indispensable party is not, however, an unyielding jurisdictional defect. 3A, Moore, Federal Practice ¶ 19.19. In this case the board’s lawyer represented the defendants; he was paid from board funds, and the board’s position was effectively presented before the District Court and this court. We find no substantial prejudice at this stage of the litigation and no reason to dismiss the case for this defect.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“would not, by conducting such a hearing, be bound to re-employ Moore and it would not be liable for back pay.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“provide wide discretion for the District Court to order joinder of parties ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.