Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 680 A2D 364 - Diamond v. Davis

Diamond v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

89
cited by 89 later decisions
4
states following
May 2021
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 30 district · 33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently May 2021 · most notably Jankovic v. International Crisis Group (2007), District of Columbia v. Beretta, U.S.A., Corp. (2005)

9 federal appellate · 30 district · 33 state decisions

4701996200020102020decided

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 Russell v. United States · Bailey Assignee v. Glover et al. · Hobson v. Wilson · Kilbourn v. Sunderland · Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. City of Burlington

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

  1. “[M]atters affecting her affairs with reasonable diligence under all of the circumstances. Once the plaintiff actually knows, or with exercise of reasonable diligence would have known, of some injury, its cause-in-fact, and some evidence of wrongdoing, then she is bound to file her cause of action within the applicable limitation period, measured from the date of her acquisition of the actual or imputed knowledge.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “did not cause accrual of his action against another[.]”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “In some circumstances ... the relationship of the defendants, together with other facts, may establish as a matter of law that a reasonable plaintiff with knowledge of the misconduct of one would have conducted an investigation as to the other. If that investigation would, as a matter of law, have revealed some evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the other defendant, then the cause of action will have accrued as to both.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.