Townsend v. Gray Line Bus Co.’s Empirical Analysis
767 F.2d 11 · 1985
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently May 2013 · most notably Cumpiano v. Banco Santander Puerto Rico (1990), Lussier v. Runyon (1995)
14 federal appellate · 4 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
Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · Link v. Wabash Railroad · California State Board of Equalization v. Western Marina Corp. · United States v. Radio Television News Directors Ass'n
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]t will be sufficient if the findings of fact and conclusions of law are stated orally and recorded in open court following the close of evidence.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“has no right to sit back and await decision of the case before objecting to the procedure.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The argument that the sins of the attorney should not be visited on the client is a seductive one, but its siren call is overborne by the nature of the adversary system. There is certainly no merit to the contention that dismissal of petitioner’s claim because of his counsel’s unexcused conduct imposes an unjust penalty on the client. Petitioner voluntarily chose the attorney as his representative in the action, and he cannot now avoid the consequences of the acts or omissions of this freely selected agent. Any other notion would be wholly inconsistent with our system of representative litigation, in which each party is deemed bound by the acts of his lawyer-agent and is considered to have “notice of all facts, notice of which can be charged upon the attorney.” Smith v. Ayer, 101 U.S. (Otto) 320, 326, 25 L.Ed. 955 .”
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.