Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 547 FSUPP 5 - Daniel v. Ansul Co.

Daniel v. Ansul Co.’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
June 1996
most recently cited

1 state decisions

Relationships

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

Relies on Bradshaw v. Baylor University · Wagner v. Warnasch · Wagner v. Warnasch · McMillen v. Klingensmith · Dickens v. United States

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

  1. “It is common knowledge that many, if not most, personal injury claims are ultimately settled. While the suit of an adult plaintiff can be terminated by a simple order of dismissal, the court is also well aware that many attorneys choose to terminate settled lawsuits by submitting to the court an agreed judgment reciting the terms of the settlement. There is simply no logical basis for having one rule in the former instance and a different rule in the latter instance.”
    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.