John B. v. Goetz’s Empirical Analysis
531 F.3d 448 · 2008
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably O'Brien v. ED Donnelly Enterprises Inc. (2009), 688 F. Supp. 2d 598 - Rimkus Consulting Group, Inc. v. Cammarata (2010)
8 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 state decisions
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 42 U.S.C. § 1396A (§ 1902 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Church of Scientology of California v. United States · Mallard v. United States Dist. Court for Southern Dist. of Iowa · Perlman v. United States · Fujitsu Ltd. v. Federal Express Corp. · Criss v. City of Kent
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) whether the party seeking the writ has no other adequate means, such as direct appeal, to attain the relief desired; (2) whether the petitioner will be damaged or prejudiced in a way not correctable on appeal after a final judgment; (3) whether the district court’s order is clearly erroneous as a matter of law; (4) whether the district court’s order contains an oft-repeated error, or manifests a persistent disregard of the federal rules; (5) whether the district court’s order raises new and important problems, or legal issues of first impression.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“mere skepticism that an opposing party has not produced all relevant information is not sufficient to warrant drastic electronic discovery measures.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a duty to preserve evidence arises when the party has notice that the evidence is relevant to litigation or should know that the evidence may be relevant to future litigation”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Correra
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.