Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 592 F.2d 756 - Ryan v. Edwards

Ryan v. Edwards’s Empirical Analysis

592 F.2d 756 · 1979

Citation profile

83
cited by 83 later decisions
12
states following
February 2013
most recently cited

31 federal appellate · 9 district · 19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently February 2013 · most notably McGinty v. Beranger Volkswagen, Inc. (1980), Slaymaker v. Westgate State Bank (1987)

31 federal appellate · 9 district · 19 state decisions — followed in 12 states

44019791980199020002010decided

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 Continental Ore Company v. Union Carbide and Carbon Corporation · Tcherepnin v. Knight · Duval v. Midwest Auto City, Inc. · Nieto v. Pence

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

  1. “[n]o transferor shall violate any rule prescribed under this section or give a false statement to a transferee in making any disclosure required by such rule.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Both the language of the statute and its history show that it has one purpose: to enable the purchaser of a motor vehicle to know how many miles the vehicle has traveled, as a guide to its safety, reliability and value.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “broadly construed to effectuate its purpose,”
    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.