Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 518 U.S. 415 - Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, Inc.

Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

2,463
cited by 2,463 later decisions
17
cited 17 times by the Supreme Court
26
states following
February 2026
most recently cited

630 federal appellate · 321 district · 144 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 2,463 later decisions (17 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2026 · most notably Schriro Director Arizona Department of Corrections v. Summerlin (2004), Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Leatherman Tool Group, Inc. (2001)

630 federal appellate · 321 district · 144 state decisions — followed in 26 states

1.2k01996200020102020decided

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

reviewedthe decision below (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 17 U.S.C. § 302 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1652 · 28 U.S.C. § 2072

Relies on Erie Co v. Tompkins · Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore · Hanna v. Plumer · BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore · Guaranty Trust Co. v. York

Cited together with Erie Co v. Tompkins · Hanna v. Plumer · Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H

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 2,463 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Under the Erie doctrine, federal courts sitting in diversity apply state substantive law and federal procedural law.”
    42 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “In reviewing a money judgment ... in which it is contended that the award is excessive or inadequate and that a new trial should have been granted unless a stipulation is entered to a different award, the appellate division shall determine that an award is excessive or inadequate if it deviates materially from what would be reasonable compensation.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “check. Trial judges have the unique opportunity to consider the evidence in the living courtroom context, ... while appellate judges see only the cold paper record.... 22 Gasperini, 518 U.S. at 438, 116 S.Ct. 2211 (internal quotation marks omitted). Thus,”
    8 later decisions 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.