Smith v. Ithaca Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
612 F.2d 215 · 1980
Citation profile
53 federal appellate · 5 district · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 81 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2013 · most notably Beech Aircraft Corp. v. Rainey (1988), Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc. (1983)
53 federal appellate · 5 district · 9 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 Seas Shipping Co. v. Sieracki · Starnes v. Penrod Drilling Co. · McAllister v. United States · Moragne v. States Marine Lines, Inc. · Mitchell v. Trawler Racer, 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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[r]ecords, reports, statements, or data compilations, in any form, of public offices or agencies, setting forth ... in civil actions and proceedings ... factual findings resulting from an investigation made pursuant to authority granted by law, unless the sources of information or other circumstances indicate lack of trustworthiness.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he language of Rule 803 suggests that 'factual findings' defines something other than 'opinions' and 'diagnoses' which are admissible under the Rule 803(6) when contained in the records of 'a regularly conducted business activity.' ... Since these terms are used in similar context within the same Rule, it is logical to assume that Congress intended that the terms have different and distinct meanings.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“evaluative conclusions and opinions of the Coast Guard Marine Board of Investigation contained in the report should not have been admitted into evidence.”
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.