Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 598 F.2d 1175 - Curlott v. Campbell

Curlott v. Campbell’s Empirical Analysis

598 F.2d 1175 · 1979

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
4
states following
July 2023
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably Baker v. Limber (1981), Kester v. Campbell (1981)

13 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions

190197919801990200020102020decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 1651 · 28 U.S.C. § 2201 · 5 U.S.C. § 553 (Administrative Procedure Act of 1946) · 5 U.S.C. § 5596 · 5 U.S.C. § 5941

Relies on Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Mathews v. Eldridge · Goldberg v. Kelly · United States v. Testan · Catlin 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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “'[p]iecemeal adjudication does not become appealable merely because [it is] cast in the form of a declaratory judgment.'”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. ““Courts of record within their respective jurisdictions shall have power to declare the rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is, or could be sought. No action or proceeding shall be dismissed or stayed for the sole reason that only declaratory relief has been sought. The declaratory may be either affirmative or negative in nature; and such declaration shall have the force and effect of a final judgment.”'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “'the dominant rule in federal appellate practice.' " Curlott v. Campbell, 598 F.2d 1175 , 1179 (9th Cir. 1979), quoting DiBella v. United States, 369 U.S. 121 , 126, 82 S.Ct. 654, 657, 7 L.Ed.2d 614 (1962). The "final order”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.