Harris v. Jacobs’s Empirical Analysis
621 F.2d 341 · 1980
Citation profile
33 federal appellate · 8 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 71 later decisions — most recently December 2022 · most notably Cox v. Summa Corp. (1985), Amaro v. Continental Can Co. (1984)
33 federal appellate · 8 district · 3 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1738
Relies on Estelle v. Gamble · Haines v. Kerner · Wolff v. McDonnell · Meachum v. Fano · Vitek v. Jones
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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) whether rights or interests established in the prior judgment would be destroyed or impaired by prosecution of the second action; (2) whether substantially the same evidence is presented in the two actions; (3) whether the two suits involve infringement of the same right; and (4) whether the two suits arise out of the same transactional nucleus of facts.”
26 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(r)es judicata preclusion extends only to claims that arise out of the same 'cause of action' asserted in the prior action”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“cannot be determined precisely by mechanistic application of a simple test.”
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.