Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 721 F.2d 1067 - Webber v. Eye Corp.

Webber v. Eye Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

721 F.2d 1067 · 1983

Citation profile

78
cited by 78 later decisions
August 2018
most recently cited

52 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 78 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably Ball v. City of Chicago (1993), Craighead

52 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)

Relies on Link v. Wabash Railroad · St Paul Mercury Indemnity Co v. Red Cab Co · Cardillo v. United States · Wenzler v. Pitchess · Flaksa v. Little River Marine Construction 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 78 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “A dismissal with prejudice is a harsh sanction which should usually be employed only in extreme situations, when there is a clear record of delay or contumacious conduct, or when other less drastic sanctions have proven unavailing.”
    22 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[i]f the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss the action or any claim against it.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Tamari v. Bache & Co. (Lebanon) S.A.L., 729 F.2d 469 , 472 (7th Cir.1984). The sanction of dismissal is”
    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.