Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 713 F.2d 886 - Kj Cheng v. Gaf Corporation

Kj Cheng v. Gaf Corporation’s Empirical Analysis

713 F.2d 886 · 1983

Citation profile

76
cited by 76 later decisions
2
states following
October 2015
most recently cited

40 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently October 2015 · most notably Oliveri v. Thompson (1986), CFM of Connecticut, Inc. v. Chowdhury (1996)

40 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

3601983199020002010decided

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 Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay · Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper · Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Risjord · White v. New Hampshire Department of Employment Security

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

  1. “[t]he fee award here [in Cheng ] bears no relation to anything that occurred in the district court, since the sanction was imposed for appellant's efforts in appellate courts. The propriety of the award here will not be affected by subsequent developments in the case; it is thus unlike an award of fees for frivolous discovery motions, which 'may not be completely separable from the merits of the underlying action.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[T]he order must conclusively determine the disputed question, resolve an important issue completely separate from the merits of the action, and be effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[a] rule permitting a district court to sanction [a party] for appealing an adverse ruling might deter even a courageous lawyer from seeking the reversal of a district court decision.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.