Mandarino v. Pollard’s Empirical Analysis
718 F.2d 845 · 1983
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 6 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently July 2017 · most notably 28 Cal. 4th 888 - Mycogen Corp. v. Monsanto Co. (2002), Conner v. Reinhard (1988)
36 federal appellate · 6 district · 4 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. § 1738 · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866)
Relies on United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Sunshine Anthracite Coal Co. v. Adkins · Murzyn v. United States · House v. Stynchcombe · Stern v. United States Gypsum, 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 89 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The doctrine of res judicata is that a final judgment on the merits in a court of competent jurisdiction bars the same parties or their privies from relitigating not only the issues which were in fact raised and decided but also all other issues which could have been raised in the prior action____ The essential elements of the doctrine are generally stated to be: (1) a final judgment on the merits in an earlier action; (2) an identity of the cause of action in both the earlier and the later suit; and (3) an identity of parties or their privies in the two suits.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“A government and its officers are in privity for purposes of res judicata.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[A] cause of action consists of a single core of operative facts which give the plaintiff a right to seek redress for the wrong concerned. Even though one group of facts may give rise to different claims for relief upon different theories of recovery, there remains a single cause of action. If the same facts are essential to the maintenance of both proceedings or the same evidence is needed to sustain both, then there is identity between the allegedly different causes of action asserted, and res judicata bars the latter section.”
1 later decision 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.