Estrada v. Rowland’s Empirical Analysis
69 F.3d 405 · 1995
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1343
Relies on Dennis v. Dennis · Securities & Exchange Commission v. Research Automation Corp. · R.W. International Corp. v. Welch Foods, Inc. · Stevens v. Greyhound Lines, Inc. · Pennwalt Corporation v. Durand-Wayland, Inc., Sunkist Growers, Inc., Non-Party
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We note that 'failure to appear’ for a deposition is strictly construed and Rule 37(d) sanctions apply only when a deponent ‘literally fails to show up for a deposition session.’ ” (citations omitted)); Salahuddin v. Harris, 782 F.2d 1127, 1131 (2d Cir.1986) (same); Stevens v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 710 F.2d 1224, 1228 (7th Cir.1983) (same). . Similarly, other circuits have held that the remedy for an unprepared witness at a deposition is”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Estrada attended his deposition but refused to testify. This is not a 'failure to appear' for the purposes of Rule 37(d).”); Aziz v. Wright, 34 F.3d 587, 589 (8th Cir.1994) (concluding that”
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.