Doyle v. Shubs’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently April 2017
2 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 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 Franklin v. Albert · Fishman v. Brooks · Spring v. Geriatric Authority of Holyoke · Fidler v. E. M. Parker Co. · Fidler v. Eastman Kodak Co.
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the plaintiff had originally retained counsel L. Barry Tinkoff and Delphus (sic) Jones, an attorney who was practicing in Rhode Island, on March 25, 1983.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Doyle v. Shubs“reservation of rights” is rejected. See Rule 17(a) of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts (”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Doyle v. Shubs
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.