Rosen v. Dick’s Empirical Analysis
639 F.2d 82 · 1980
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 8 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 86 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably Ford Motor Co. v. Summit Motor Products, Inc. (1991), City of New York v. Pullman Inc. (1981)
24 federal appellate · 8 district · 8 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 15 U.S.C. § 1 (§ 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 19 (§ 8 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore · Eisenstadt v. Baker · Douglas v. Alabama · Pennhurst State School & Hospital v. Halderman · Teamsters Local Union 657 v. Rodriguez
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 86 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) Right Preserved. The right of trial by jury as declared by the Seventh Amendment to the Constitution or as given by a statute of the United States shall be preserved to the parties inviolate. (b) Demand. Any party may demand a trial by jury of any issue triable of right by a jury by (1) serving upon the other parties a demand therefor in writing at any time after the commencement of the action and not later than 10 days after the service of the last pleading directed to such issue, and (2) filing the demand as required by Rule 5(d). (c) Same: Specification of Issues. In the demand a party may specify the issues which the party wishes so tried; otherwise the party shall be deemed to have demanded trial by jury for all the issues so triable. (d) Waiver. The’ failure of a party to serve and file a demand as required by this rule constitutes a waiver by the party of trial by jury.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]f the demand does not pertain to certain issues then one of the parties concerned with those issues should make a demand therefor. Thus assume that A sues X; X answers and also files a third-party complaint against Y. If A makes a timely general demand the demand embraces all the issues between A and X, and X may rely thereon and need not make a demand for those issues. It is rather strained, however, to say that A’s general demand embraces the third-party issues between X and Y, with which A is not concerned. And it would seem that either X or Y should make a timely demand as to the third-party issues if a jury trial is desired as to those issues.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the initial jury demand ... will put the other parties on notice that a jury ... will be trying all issues relating to (the) general area of dispute,”
4 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.