Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 667 F.2d 420 - Brink v. M E Brink F

Brink v. M E Brink F’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
2
states following
February 2013
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 7 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently February 2013 · most notably Reich v. Lancaster (1995), Frank Landry v. Air Line Pilots Association International Afl-Cio, Taca Airlines, S.A. And Charles J. Huttinger (1990)

2 federal appellate · 7 district · 2 state decisions

18019701980199020002010decided

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 Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala. · American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah · United Airlines, Inc. v. McDonald · Geddes v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co. · Nedd v. United Mine Workers

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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “a beneficiary or one suing on his behalf can maintain a suit against the trustee to enforce the trust or to enjoin or obtain redress for a breach of trust.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Smith
  2. “the timeliness requirement of Rule 24 should not be as strictly enforced as in a case where intervention is only permissive.”
    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.