Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 487 FSUPP 81 - Williams v. Shell Oil Co.

Williams v. Shell Oil Co.’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
August 2007
most recently cited

2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently August 2007

2 district ·

20198019902000decided

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 250 F. Supp. 936 - Segal v. American Casualty Company of Reading, Pa. · McRae v. Arabian American Oil Co. · 51 Mich. App. 570 - Jamison v. Lloyd · 9 Mich. App. 176 - Dauer v. Zabel · 19 Mich. App. 198 - Dauer v. Zabel

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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[i]f state law applicable in the court from which the case is removed does not require the parties to make express demands in order to claim trial by jury, they need not make demands after removal unless the court directs that they do so within a specified time if they desire to claim trial by jury.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““This provision is of limited applicability, and was intended to avoid inadvertent waivers of jury trials where state law requires that no express demand be made at all.””
    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.