Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 96,233 Paul J. Robinson v. Leonard J. Heilman’s Empirical Analysis
563 F.2d 1304 · 1977
Citation profile
41 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently October 2020 · most notably William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. v. ITT Continental Baking Co. (1981), McGonigle v. Combs (1992)
41 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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
Relies on Ernst & Ernst v. Hochfelder · Palmer v. Hoffman · Vandenbark v. Owens-Illinois Glass Co. · Diffenderfer v. Central Baptist Church of Miami, Florida, Inc. · United States v. Anthony J. Demma, United States of America v. Henry Brulay
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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No exception is required when it would not have produced any results in the trial court because ‘a solid wall of Circuit authority’ then foreclosed the point. . . . ‘[Wjere we to insist that an exception be taken to save the point for appeal, the unhappy result would be that we would encourage defense counsel to burden district courts with repeated assaults on the then-settled principles out of hope that those principles will be later overturned.’”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'when it would not have produced any results in the trial court because a”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Rule 51 was designed to prevent unnecessary new trials caused by errors in instructions that the district court could have corrected if they had been brought to its attention at the proper time.”
2 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.