Lepore v. Vidockler’s Empirical Analysis
792 F.2d 272 · 1986
Citation profile
40 federal appellate · 12 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably Karak v. Bursaw Oil Corp. (2002), United States v. Boch Oldsmobile, Inc. (1990)
40 federal appellate · 12 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on Elrod v. Burns · Ackermann v. United States · Evans v. Jeff D. Ex Rel. Johnson · Georgia v. Wenger · Harsco Corp. v. Zlotnicki
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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“relieve a party or the party’s legal representative from a final judgment, order or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence ...; (3) fraud ... of an adverse party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged ...; or (6) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment. The motion shall be made within a reasonable time, and for the reasons (1), (2), and (3) not more than one year after the judgment ... was entered or taken.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure was not intended to benefit an unsuccessful litigant who, long after time during which appeal from final judgment could have been perfected, first seeks to express dissatisfaction, since this Rule was not intended to afford a substitute for an appeal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It is difficult to see how the district court abused its discretion [in denying a motion to reconsider] when [the movant] offered no explanation for the lateness of the [new] affidavits.”
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.