Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 739 F.2d 699 - Muniz v. Vidal

Muniz v. Vidal’s Empirical Analysis

739 F.2d 699 · 1984

Citation profile

34
cited by 34 later decisions
10
states following
April 2014
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 5 district · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently April 2014 · most notably Zuelzke Tool & Engineering Co. v. Anderson Die Castings, Inc. (1991), Anilina Fabrique de Colorants v. Aakash Chemicals & Dyestuffs, Inc. (1988)

9 federal appellate · 5 district · 14 state decisions — followed in 10 states

1201984199020002010decided

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 H. F. Livermore Corp. v. Aktiengesellschaft Gebruder Loepfe · Planet Corp. v. Sullivan · Charlton L. Davis & Company, P. C. v. Fedder Data Center, Inc., Financial Computer Corporation · Wilson v. Moore & Associates, Inc. · Lutomski v. Panther Valley Coin Exchange

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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “By the Court. In all eases the party entitled to a judgment by default shall apply to the court therefor; but no judgment by default shall be entered against a minor or incompetent person unless represented in the action by a guardian, conservator or guardian ad litem who has appeared therein. If the party against whom judgment by default is sought has appeared in the actioyi, he (or, if appearing by representative, his representative) shall be served with written notice of the application for judgment at least three days prior to the hearing on such application. If, in order to enable the court to enter judgment or to carry it into effect, it is necessary to take an account or to determine the amount of damages or to establish the truth of any averment by evidence or to make an investigation of any other matter, the court may conduct such hearings or order such references as it deems necessary and proper and shall accord a right of trial by jury to the parties when and as required by any statute of this state. (Emphasis added).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “If the party against whom judgment by default is sought has appeared in the action, the party ... shall be served jwith written notice of the application for judgment at least 3 days prior to the hearing on such application. '”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “indicated to the moving party a clear purpose to defend the suit.”
    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.