Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 754 F.2d 430 - Simcox v. San Juan Shipyard, Inc.

Simcox v. San Juan Shipyard, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

754 F.2d 430 · 1985

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
2
states following
August 2010
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 15 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently August 2010 · most notably Decker v. Glenfed, Inc. (1994), Lawrence Greebel Richard Crane Brian Robinson John Ann Somers v. Ftp Software Inc (1999)

11 federal appellate · 15 district · 2 state decisions

2201985199020002010decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Rhode Island District Court)

Relationships

Relies on United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Hecht Co. v. Bowles · Inwood Laboratories, Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc. · Scovill v. Thayer · McGinty v. Beranger Volkswagen, 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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “a court must factor in the policy of simplicity in pleading which the drafters of the Federal Rules codified in Rule 8. Rule 8 requires a “short and plain statement of the claim,” and calls for “simple, concise and direct” allegations. Indeed, Rule 9(b)’s particularity requirement does not mute the general principles set out in Rule 8; rather, the two rules must be read in harmony. “Thus, it is inappropriate to focus on the fact that Rule 9(b) requires particularity in pleading fraud. This is too narrow an approach and fails to take account of the general simplicity and flexibility contemplated by the rules.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[i]n all averments of fraud or mistake, the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake shall be stated with particularity. Malice, intent, knowledge, and other condition of mind of a person may be averred generally.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(f) provides that “all pleadings shall be construed so as to do substantial justice.” Considered as a whole, we find that the facts and circumstances pleaded in the complaint were sufficient to give notice to [the defendant] of the nature of the claims against it and find no error in the district court’s consideration of fraud, [citation omitted]”
    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.