United States v. Dae Rim Fishery Co.’s Empirical Analysis
794 F.2d 1392 · 1986
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently April 2024 · most notably Cintron v. Union Pacific Railroad (1987), In re Penn Central Transportation Co. (1987)
14 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2415 (Indian Claims Limitation Act of 1982) · 28 U.S.C. § 2416 · 33 U.S.C. § 1321 · 33 U.S.C. § 409
Relies on Lojek v. Thomas · United States v. City of Redwood · Loya v. Desert Sands Unified School District · United States v. Oswego Barge Corp. · United States v. Neidorf
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`a complaint is filed when it is placed in the actual or constructive custody of the clerk [of court]....'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“to elevate a local rule . . . to the status of a jurisdictional requirement would conflict with the mandate of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 1 to provide a just and speedy determination of every action.”
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.