Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 558 F.2d 257 - Stallworth v. Monsanto Co.

Stallworth v. Monsanto Co.’s Empirical Analysis

558 F.2d 257 · 1977

Citation profile

145
cited by 145 later decisions
13
states following
August 2023
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 7 district · 26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 145 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably Pansy v. Borough of Stroudsburg (1994), Horton v. Meskill (1982)

17 federal appellate · 7 district · 26 state decisions — followed in 13 states

550197719801990200020102020decided

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 American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah · Franks v. Bowman Transportation Co. · Donaldson v. United States · Humphrey v. Moore · National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. New York

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

  1. “[T]o take any prejudice that the existing parties may incur if intervention is allowed into account under the rubric of timeliness would be to rewrite Rule 24 by creating an additional prerequisite to intervention as of right.”
    37 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he question whether an application for intervention is timely is largely committed to the discretion of the trial court, and its determination will not be overturned on appeal unless an abuse of discretion is shown[,]”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[t]he length of time during which the would-be intervenor actually knew or reasonably should have known of his interest in the case before he petitioned for leave to intervene.”
    3 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.