Chang v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
778 F.2d 83 · 1985
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently January 2022
15 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 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 Ackermann v. United States · Klapprott v. United States · Douglas v. Alabama · Simuel v. United States · Lubben v. Selective Service System Local Board No. 27
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Rule 60(b) cannot be used to relieve a litigant from improvident strategic choices.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“may be characterized as an extraordinary circumstance requiring relief [under 60(b) ].”
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.