DeFina v. Latimer’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently February 2008
1 district ·
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 Haines v. Kerner · 381 F. Supp. 529 - Boruski v. Stewart · Shaw v. Briscoe · Prezzi v. Berzak · 413 F. Supp. 475 - Choate v. United States
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The instant complaint ... [which] places an unjustifiable burden on defendants to determine the nature of the claim against them and to speculate on what their defenses might be, and which imposes a similar burden on the court to sort out the facts now hidden in a mass of charges, arguments, generalizations and rumors, violates the rule [F.R.Civ.P. 8] .. ., and is subject to dismissal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Holsey v. Collins
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.