Carl James Wedding v. John W. Wingo’s Empirical Analysis
483 F.2d 1131 · 1973
Citation profile
36 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2014 · most notably Wingo v. Wedding (1974), Fred A. Cruz, Etc. v. W. B. (Bill) Hauck (1975)
36 federal appellate ·
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.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2243 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 631 (Federal Magistrate Act of 1979) · 28 U.S.C. § 636
Relies on United States v. Yellow Cab Co. · Fourco Glass Company v. Transmirra Products Corporation · Clifford Macevoy Co v. United States · Holiday v. Johnston · D. Ginsberg & Sons, Inc. v. Popkin
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[F]or triers of fact totally to reject an opposed view impeaches neither their impartiality nor the propriety of their conclusions ... Findings as to the design, motive and intent with which men act depend peculiarly upon the credit given to witnesses by those who see and hear them.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Any district court of the United States, by the concurrence of a majority of all the judges of such district court, may establish rules pursuant to which any full-time United States magistrate, or, where there is no full-time magistrate reasonably available, any part-time magistrate specially designated by the court, may be assigned within the territorial jurisdiction of such court such additional duties as are not inconsistent with the Constitution and laws of the United States. The additional duties authorized by rule may include, but are not restricted to— (1) service as a special master in an appropriate civil action, pursuant to the applicable provisions of this title and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for the United States district courts; (2) assistance to a district judge in the conduct of pretrial or discovery proceedings in civil or criminal actions ; and (3) preliminary review of applications for posttrial relief made by individuals convicted of criminal offenses, and submission of a report and recommendations to facilitate the decision of the district judge having jurisdiction over the case as to whether there should be a hearing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ellis v. Buchkoe“The Act granted authority to the Magistrate to conduct only a preliminary review of applications for post-trial relief in order to facilitate the decision of the District Court as to whether there should be a hearing.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ellis v. Buchkoe
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.