Perry v. Sera’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
41 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Calandro v. Parkerson (1998), Flax v. Schertler (2007)
41 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 National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, Inc. · Poulis v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. · Higgins v. Carr Bros. · Cobb v. Standard Drug Co., Inc. · United States Wiltec Guam Inc v. Kahaluu Construction Co 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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]t is the plaintiff that is being sanctioned here. Appellant, as plaintiff, chose to utilize the court system to try to redress wrongs that had allegedly been done to her. When invoking such aid, a plaintiff should be prepared and willing to follow the rules that keep that system running in an orderly and efficient manner. Noncompliance with court orders and rules may cause the system to bog down and may adversely affect other litigants. When a plaintiff is personally responsible for this type of delay, he or she prejudices not only the defendant but also the ability of other persons — persons that are doing what is necessary to follow the rules — to utilize the system.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“(b) Failure to Comply With Order. (2) Sanctions by This Court. If a party ... designated ... to testify on behalf of a party fails to obey an order to provide or permit discovery ... the Court may make such orders in regard to the failure as are just, including among others the following: (C) An order ... dismissing the action or proceeding or any part thereof, or rendering a judgment by default against the disobedient party;.... (d) Failure of Party to Attend at Own Deposition or Serve Answers to Interrogatories or Respond to Request for Inspection. If a party ... designated ... to testify on behalf of a party fails (1) to appear before the officer who is to take the deposition, after being served with a proper notice ... the Court on motion may make such orders in regard to the failure as are just, and among others it may take any action authorized under paragraphs (A), (B), and (C) of subdivision (b)(2) of this Rule.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.