Linton v. Shell Oil Co.’s Empirical Analysis
563 F.3d 556 · 2009
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 43 U.S.C. § 1331 (Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006) · 46 U.S.C. § 30101 (Extension of Admiralty Jurisdiction Act)
Relies on Cryts v. French · Jannotti v. United States · Chemical Bank v. Arthur Andersen & Co. · United States v. Banco Cafetero Panama · Gumer v. Shearson, Hammill & Co.
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“section 1292(b) authorizes certification of orders for interlocutory appeal, not certification of questions”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“R. Doc. 237 at 1, and that there is substantial ground for difference of opinion as to whether a relator who initiates an investigation after an alleged fraud can be considered an original source. The phrasing of defendants' contentions suggests that they are alleging error, which, as noted, is not a proper ground for interlocutory appeal. To the extent that they are not, their arguments are insufficient to create a substantial ground for difference of opinion. Initially, although defendants make repeated use of the term”
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.