United States v. Thorp’s Empirical Analysis
655 F.2d 997 · 1981
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently May 2017 · most notably Hybritech Incorporated v. Abbott Laboratories (1988), Danny Padilla William Neary v. Danny Padilla (2000)
26 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 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 Maness v. Meyers · Hoffman v. Beer Drivers & Salesmen's Local Union No. 888 · Reserve Mining Company, a Minnesota Corporation v. Environmental Protection Agency and William D. Ruckelshaus, Individually Andas Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Reserve Mining Company v. United States of America, United States of America v. Reserve Mining Company, Reserve Mining Company v. United States of America, the State of Wisconsin v. Reserve Mining Company, Minnesota Environmental Law Institute, Inc. v. United States of America, the State of Michigan v. Reserve Mining Company · Reserve Mining Co. v. Lord
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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`is judge-made doctrine designed to avoid the confusion and waste of time that might flow from putting the same issues before two courts at the same time.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the general rule is that jurisdiction over any matters involved in [an] appeal is immediately transferred from the district court to the court of appeals,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he district court is divested of authority to proceed further, ... until the mandate has been issued by the court of appeals.”
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.