Pallazola v. Rucker’s Empirical Analysis
797 F.2d 1116 · 1986
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably Negron v. Llarena (1998), Oakville Development Corporation 10-12 v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (1993)
7 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 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. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1359
Relies on Roe v. Wade · Flast v. Cohen · Aetna Life Ins Co of Hartford Conn v. Haworth · Powell v. McCormack · Southern Pacific Terminal Company v. Interstate Commerce Commission
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An executor, administrator, or any person representing the estate of a decedent or appointed pursuant to statute with authority to bring an action for wrongful death is deemed to be a citizen only of the same state as the decedent; and the representative of an infant or incompetent is given similar treatment. The purpose is to prevent either the creation or destruction of diversity jurisdiction by the appointment of a representative of different citizenship from that of the decedent or person represented.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“capable of repetition, yet evading review”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) the challenged action was in its duration too short to be fully litigated prior to its cessation or expiration, and (2) there was a reasonable expectation that the same complaining party would be subjected to the same action again.”
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.