No. 81-1928’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
5 district · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently December 2020
5 district · 9 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 Monroe v. Pape · Imbler v. Pachtman · Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala. · D'Oench, Duhme & Co. v. Federal Deposit Insurance · Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. Hawn
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“For there to be reversible error, it is mandatory for the appellant properly to identify the error to the trial court and to suggest a legally appropriate course of action. The reasons for this requirement go to the heart of the common law tradition and the adversary system. It affords an opportunity for correction and avoidance in the trial court in various ways: it gives the adversary the opportunity either to avoid the challenged action or to present a reasoned defense of the trial court’s action; and it provides the trial court with the alternative of altering or modifying a decision or of ordering a more fully developed record for review.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“... the rate of future inflation will be equivalent to future interest rates. From a pragmatic viewpoint, lost future earnings need not be discounted to present value, although the formula calls for a theoretical reduction to present worth, because the inflation and discount rates are legally presumed to be equal and cancel one another.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“(make) known to the court the action which he desires the court to take or his objection to the action of the court and his grounds therefor.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. In Re Bildisco · In Re Bildisco
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.