Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 539 F.2d 966 - Vernars v. Young

Vernars v. Young’s Empirical Analysis

539 F.2d 966 · 1976

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
8
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 4 district · 16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably Lewis v. Curtis (1982), 435 So. 2d 705 - Phillips v. Smalley Maintenance Services, Inc. (1983)

11 federal appellate · 4 district · 16 state decisions

21019761980199020002010decided

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 Landy v. Federal Deposit Insurance · Vogel v. W. T. Grant Co. · Marks v. Bell Tel. Co. of Penn. · Jannes v. Microwave Communications, 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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““.... there is no reason why a plaintiff cannot assert the facts from which it is believed an inference of control could be drawn. Indeed, this must be done under Rule 23.1....””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “where the allegations do not make charges against a majority of a Board”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Just as private individuals have a right to expect their telephone communication will not be monitored, they also have a reasonable expectation that their personal mail will not be opened by unauthorized person.”
    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.