Morris v. Getscher’s Empirical Analysis
708 F.2d 1306 · 1983
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently June 2005
12 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)
Relies on S.S. Zoe Colocotroni v. Puerto Rico · Putman v. Gerloff · McGowne v. Challenge-Cook Bros. · Flanigan v. Burlington Northern Inc. · Rowe International, Inc. v. J-B Enterprises, 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“in only those exceptional cases where the error has 'seriously affected the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Phenix Federal Savings & Loan Association, F.A. v. Shearson Loeb Rhoades, Inc., K/n/a Shearson/american Express, Inc., Hansen-Friedrichsen, Inc. Dallas County Alcohol Jerry Hansen Yvonne Hansen Haupert Livestock, Inc. And Donald E. And Eloise Haupert v. Shearson Loeb Rhoades, Inc., K/n/a Shearson/american Express, Inc., Shearson Loeb Rhoades, Inc., K/n/a Shearson/american Express, Inc. v. Phenix Federal Savings & Loan Association, F.A. Hansen-Friedrichsen, Inc. Dallas County Alcohol Jerry Hansen Yvonne Hansen Haupert Livestock, Inc. And Donald E. And Eloise Haupert · Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp. v. Aspen Skiing Co.“is plain error in the sense that a miscarriage of justice would otherwise occur.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Phenix Federal Savings & Loan Association, F.A. v. Shearson Loeb Rhoades, Inc., K/n/a Shearson/american Express, Inc., Hansen-Friedrichsen, Inc. Dallas County Alcohol Jerry Hansen Yvonne Hansen Haupert Livestock, Inc. And Donald E. And Eloise Haupert v. Shearson Loeb Rhoades, Inc., K/n/a Shearson/american Express, Inc., Shearson Loeb Rhoades, Inc., K/n/a Shearson/american Express, Inc. v. Phenix Federal Savings & Loan Association, F.A. Hansen-Friedrichsen, Inc. Dallas County Alcohol Jerry Hansen Yvonne Hansen Haupert Livestock, Inc. And Donald E. And Eloise Haupert · Phenix Federal Savings Loan Association Fa v. Shearson Loeb Rhoades Inc Hansen-Friedrichsen Inc“[b]ecause of the centrality of the requirement that a plaintiff prove proximate cause in a malpractice case and the concommi-tant [sic] importance of the jury’s understanding of this requirement ... we conclude that submitting the case under these instructions constituted plain error seri ously affecting the fairness of the malpractice proceeding.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Montalvo v. Lapez
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.