Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 736 F.2d 650 - Searock v. Stripling

Searock v. Stripling’s Empirical Analysis

736 F.2d 650 · 1984

Citation profile

76
cited by 76 later decisions
12
states following
November 2020
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 14 district · 16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently November 2020 · most notably In re Nasdaq Market-Makers Antitrust Litigation (1996), Chaveriat v. Williams Pipe Line Co. (1993)

15 federal appellate · 14 district · 16 state decisions — followed in 12 states

28019841990200020102020decided

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 Bonner v. City of Prichard · National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, Inc. · Societe Internationale Pour Participations Industrielles Et Commerciales, S. A. v. Rogers · Emerick v. Fenick Industries, 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 76 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “not only as possession, but as the legal right to obtain the documents requested upon demand.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A finding of such extreme circumstances necessary to support the sanction of dismissal must, at a minimum, be based on evidence of the sanctioned party’s willfulness, bad faith or fault in failing to comply with a discovery order. Thus, it is well established that a party’s simple negligence or other action grounded in misunderstanding of a discovery order does not justify the “use of the Draconian remedy of dismissal.” [citations omitted and emphasis added]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “documents are deemed to be within the 'possession, custody or control' . . . if the party has actual possession, custody or control, or has the legal right to obtain the documents on demand”
    1 later decision 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.