Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 600 F.2d 1148 - Pony Creek Cattle Co. v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.

Pony Creek Cattle Co. v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.’s Empirical Analysis

600 F.2d 1148 · 1979

Citation profile

251
cited by 251 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

99 federal appellate · 29 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 251 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2019 · most notably Naftel v. Commissioner (1985), Pinney Dock & Transport Co. v. Penn Central Corp. (1988)

99 federal appellate · 29 district · 4 state decisions

138019791980199020002010decided

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 Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Foman v. Davis · Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. · Standard Oil Company of New Jersey v. United States · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.

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

  1. “plaintiff must show that the defendants concealed the conduct complained of, and that he failed, despite the exercise of due diligence on his part, to discover the facts that form the basis of his claim.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The leap from the plaintiffs' knowledge of the ... complaint to actual or constructive knowledge of their cause of action therefore involves factual issues.... [A]n inference that the plaintiffs would have discovered adequate support before [the start of the limitations period] had they been reasonably diligent.... is not so compelling as to entitle the defendants to summary judgment.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “may in some circumstances suffice to give notice”
    5 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.