Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 785 F.2d 670 - Meadows v. Bicrodyne Corp.

Meadows v. Bicrodyne Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

785 F.2d 670 · 1986

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently March 2018

6 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

901986199020002010decided

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 Kramas v. Security Gas & Oil Inc. · Michael J. Von Brimer, Co-Executors of the Estate of Joseph W. Von Brimer, Deceased v. Whirlpool Corporation · The Central Trust Company and Albert E. Heekin, Jr., Co-Executors of the Estate of Albert E. Heekin, Deceased v. The United States. Katharine Heekin Herrlinger, James R. Heekin, Jr., and the Central Trust Company, Executors Under the Will of James J. Heekin, Deceased v. The United States. The Central Trust Company, Successor and Trustee Under the Will of Alma R. Heekin, Deceased v. The United States · 40 Cal. App. 3d 1014 - Common Wealth Insurance Systems, Inc. v. Kersten · Hoefferle Truck Sales, Inc. v. Divco-Wayne Corp.

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

  1. “uncontroverted evidence irrefutably demonstrates [Appellants] discovered or should have discovered the fraudulent conduct,”
    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.