Weinberger v. Kendrick’s Empirical Analysis
698 F.2d 61 · 1982
Citation profile
78 federal appellate · 32 district · 33 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 407 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2024 · most notably Finley v. United States (1989), Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. Dabit (2006)
78 federal appellate · 32 district · 33 state decisions — followed in 14 states
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
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act)
Relies on United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Alyeska Pipeline Service Company v. Wilderness Society · Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin · Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores
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 407 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The hallmark of Rule 23 is the flexibility it affords to the courts to utilize the class device in a particular case to best serve the ends of justice for the affected parties and to promote judicial efficiencies. Temporary settlement classes have proved to be quite useful in resolving major class action disputes. While their use may still be controversial, most Courts have recognized their utility and have authorized the parties to seek to compromise their differences, including class action issues through this means.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'clear evidence' that the challenged actions 'are entirely without color and [are taken] for reasons of harassment or delay or for other improper purposes,' " Weinberger v. Kendrick, 698 F.2d at 80 (quoting Nemeroff v. Abelson, 620 F.2d 339 , 348 (2d Cir.1980)), and "a high degree of specificity in the factual findings of [the] lower courts.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“clear and specific showing that vital material was ignored by the District Court”
4 later decisions 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.