Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 781 F.2d 1040 - Barry v. Donnelly

Barry v. Donnelly’s Empirical Analysis

781 F.2d 1040 · 1986

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
1
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably Overstreet v. Kentucky Central Life Insurance (1991), Basf Corporation v. Symington (1995)

5 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

1201986199020002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2201

Relies on Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co. · Hormel v. Helvering · 102 N.J. Eq. 517 - Howard v. West Jersey, C., R.R. Co. · United States v. Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York · T... v. T...

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

  1. “Under Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co., 313 U.S. 487 , 61 S.Ct. 1020 , 85 L.Ed. 1477 (1941), the district court was bound to apply the conflicts of laws rules of the jurisdiction in which it sat, here Virginia. In that state, questions concerning statutes of limitations are deemed to be procedural and as such are controlled by the law of the forum, (citation omitted).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “lull[ing] his adversary into a false sense of security”
    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.