Coyne-Delany Co. v. Capital Development Board’s Empirical Analysis
717 F.2d 385 · 1983
Citation profile
73 federal appellate · 3 district · 12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 143 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably United States v. Williams (1984), American Hospital Supply Corp. v. Hospital Products Ltd. (1986)
73 federal appellate · 3 district · 12 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. § 1920 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on Alyeska Pipeline Service Company v. Wilderness Society · Moor v. County of Alameda · W. R. Grace & Co. v. Local Union 759, International Union of the United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum & Plastic Workers · Sullivan v. Little Hunting Park, Inc. · Robertson v. Wegmann
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 143 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No restraining order or preliminary injunction shall issue except upon the giving of security by the applicant, in such sum as the court deems proper, for the payment of such costs and damages as may be incurred or suffered by any party who is found to have been wrongfully enjoined or restrained.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“objective factors[,] such as the resources of the parties, the defendant's efforts or lack thereof to mitigate his damages, and the outcome of the underlying suit.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. 451 F. Supp. 2d 1026 - Pro Edge L.P. v. Gue · Joseph W. Teague Helen B. Teague Steven Allen Barker Rita Strahowski Swannee Beck Karen Perez Tucker, Lifetime Partners of Ptl, as Representatives of a Nationwide Class Consisting of 150,000 Ptl Lifetime Partners v. James O. Bakker David A. Taggart Aimee Cortese Deloitte, Haskins & Sells, and Roe Messner, A/K/A Ronald Messner Messner Enterprises Commercial Builders of Kansas, Inc. Laventhol & Horwath William J. Spears, North Carolina Securities Commission, Amicus Curiae. Joseph W. Teague Helen B. Teague Steven Allen Barker Rita Strahowski Swannee Beck Karen Perez Tucker, Lifetime Partners of Ptl, as Representatives of a Nationwide Class Consisting of 150,000 Ptl Lifetime Partners v. David A. Taggart, and James O. Bakker Aimee Cortese Roe Messner, A/K/A Ronald Messner Messner Enterprises Commercial Builders of Kansas, Inc. Laventhol & Horwath William J. Spears Deloitte, Haskins & Sells, North Carolina Securities Commission, Amicus Curiae. Joseph W. Teague Helen B. Teague Steven Allen Barker Rita Strahowski Swannee Beck Karen Perez Tucker, Lifetime Partners of Ptl, as Representatives of a Nationwide Class Consisting of 150,000 Ptl Lifetime Partners v. Deloitte, Haskins & Sells, and James O. Bakker David A. Taggart Aimee Cortese Roe Messner, A/K/A Ronald Messner Messner Enterprises Commercial Builders of Kansas, Inc. Laventhol & Horwath William J. Spears, North Carolina Securities Commission, Amicus Curiae. Joseph W. Teague Helen B. Teague Steven Allen Barker Rita Strahowski Swannee Beck Karen Perez Tucker, Lifetime Partners of Ptl, as Representatives of a Nationwide Class Consisting of 150,000 Ptl Lifetime Partners v. James O. Bakker, and David A. Taggart Aimee Cortese Roe Messner, A/K/A Ronald Messner Messner Enterprises Commercial Builders of Kansas, Inc. Laventhol & Horwath William J. Spears Deloitte, Haskins & Sells, North Carolina Securities Commission, Amicus Curiae“it is one thing to say that the requirement of a bond can in effect be waived when there is a good reason for doing so, ... and another to say that where a substantial bond is clearly required by the equities of the case the district court nevertheless has carte blanche to excuse the plaintiff from paying any damages on the bond.”
2 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.