Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 685 F.2d 1318 - Baumer v. United States

Baumer v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

685 F.2d 1318 · 1982

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
3
states following
September 2021
most recently cited

34 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently September 2021 · most notably Piambino v. Bailey (1985), Jackson v. Alabama State Tenure Commission (2005)

34 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

22019821990200020102020decided

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 Bonner v. City of Prichard · Burnet v. Logan · Calder v. United States · White v. Murtha · Schwartz v. NMS Industries, Inc.

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

  1. ““[t]here is nothing in the record to indicate that the evidence produced at the hearing after remand was unavailable to the taxpayers during the first trial. The taxpayers simply chose not to produce that evidence. They chose their trial strategy, litigated accordingly, and lost. They are not now entitled to resurrect a previously abandoned issue.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““A decision of a legal issue or issues by an appellate court ... must be followed in all subsequent proceedings in the same case in the trial court or on a later appeal in the appellate court, unless [1] the evidence in a subsequent trial [w]as substantially different, [2] controlling authority has since made a contrary decision of the law applicable to such issues, or [3] the decision was clearly erroneous and would work a manifest injustice.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[p]ermitting evidence of the value of the option when granted was outside the scope of [the] mandate”
    1 later decision 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.