Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 491 FSUPP 511 - Rumbaugh v. Beck

Rumbaugh v. Beck’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
June 2019
most recently cited

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently June 2019

701980199020002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)

Relies on Hamilton Watch Co. v. Benrus Watch Co. · Alvado v. General Motors Corp. · Semmes Motors, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co. · Nelson v. Miller · A. L. K. Corp. v. Columbia Pictures Industries, 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The appointment of a receiver is a matter within the sound discretion of the court, and each case must be determined upon its own conditions and circumstances, and in exercising this right the courts should ever keep in mind that a receiver is, like an injunction, an extraordinary remedy, and ought never be made except in cases of necessity, and upon a clear and satisfactory showing that the emergency exists, in order to protect the interests of the plaintiff in the property involved. The power of appointing receivers is one which the courts have said should be sparingly exercised and with great caution. (Emphasis added). Rumbaugh v. Beck, 491 F.Supp. 511, 520 (E.D.Pa.), aff'd mem., 636 F.2d 1210 (3rd Cir.1980) (citing Miller v. Fisco, Inc., 376 F.Supp. 468, 470 (E.D.Pa.1974). See also Goodman v. DeAzoulay, 539 F.Supp. 10 (E.D.Pa.1981).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It is well settled that monetary loss alone does not constitute the kind of injury essential to the granting of a receivership.” (ECF No. 8-1 at 18). Minuteman misquotes this case. The correct quotation follows:”
    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.