Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 493 F.2d 333 - Fenstermacher v. Philadelphia National Bank

Fenstermacher v. Philadelphia National Bank’s Empirical Analysis

493 F.2d 333 · 1974

Citation profile

65
cited by 65 later decisions
4
states following
May 2015
most recently cited

33 federal appellate · 5 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently May 2015 · most notably Coughlin v. Capitol Cement Co. (1978), K-Mart Corporation v. Oriental Plaza Inc (1989)

33 federal appellate · 5 district · 5 state decisions

28019741980199020002010decided

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 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 28 U.S.C. § 1331

Relies on Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. United States · Beacon Theaters Inc v. C Westover · Eisenstadt v. Baker · In re Disbarment of Allison · International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders, Blacksmiths, Forgers & Helpers v. Hardeman

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

  1. “Although we do not find reversible error in [the district court’s consolidation], it would he advisable in the future for district courts, when contemplating consolidation of the trial of the action on the merits with the hearing of an application for a preliminary injunction, promptly to notify counsel and request affirmative, on the record, response, especially where jury trial rights may be involved.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “consolidation ... must be accompanied by notice to the parties, either before or after the commencement of the hearings, sufficient to enable them to present all evidence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “not prejudicial ... since the depositions do not appear to add any information to that given in oral testimony by the deponents and otherwise developed at the hearing.”
    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.