Consolidated Data Terminals v. Applied Digital Data Systems, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
708 F.2d 385 · 1983
Citation profile
58 federal appellate · 11 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 120 later decisions — most recently July 2018 · most notably Chemtrol Adhesives, Inc. v. American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance (1989), Cox v. Summa Corp. (1985)
58 federal appellate · 11 district · 11 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
Relies on Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. · 27 Cal. 3d 167 - Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co. · 11 Cal. 3d 574 - Hurtado v. Superior Court · 16 Cal. 3d 313 - Bernhard v. Harrah's Club · 24 Cal. 3d 809 - Egan v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance
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 120 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“does not permit amendments to include issues which may be 'inferentially suggested by incidental evidence in the record.'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“late pleading amendments are improper under the rule if they cause substantial prejudice to the opposing party.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) Express warranties by the seller created as follows: (a) Any affirmation of fact or promise made by the seller to the buyer which relates to the goods and becomes part of the basis of the bargain creates an express warranty that the goods shall conform to the affirmation or promise. (b) Any description of the goods which is made part of the basis of the bargain creates an express warranty that the goods shall conform to the description or model. (c) Any or model sample . . . (2) It is not necessary to the creation of an express warranty that the seller use formal words such as “warrant” or “guarantee” or that he have a specific intention to make a warranty, but an affirmation merely of the value of the goods or a statement purporting to be merely the seller’s opinion or commendation of the goods does not create a warranty.”
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.