← 813 F.2d 1041 - Johnson v. Armored Transport of California, Inc.

Johnson v. Armored Transport of California, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

813 F.2d 1041 · 1987

Citation profile

cited by 42 later decisions

states following

January 2023

most recently cited

24 federal appellate · 1 district · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently January 2023 · most notably Brown v. Trustees of Boston University (1989), Hubred v. Control Data Corp. (1989)

24 federal appellate · 1 district · 10 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. § 1291 · 29 U.S.C. § 185 (§ 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Franchise Tax Board of the State of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California · Avco Corporation v. Aero Lodge No 735 International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers · International Longshoremen's Ass'n v. Davis · Gilchrist v. Jim Slemons Imports, Inc. · Farley Transportation Co. v. Santa Fe Trail Transportation Co.

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

“Although courts construe strictly the requirement that a motion be made after a ease-in-chief, they are generally more liberal about what suffices as a motion for a directed verdict after the close of all the evidence. Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(b) may be satisfied by an ambiguous or inartfully made motion for a directed verdict or by an objection to an instruction for insufficient evidence to submit an issue to the jury.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Humetrix, Inc. v. Gemplus S.C.A.
“a federal cause of action completely pre-empts a state cause of action any complaint that comes within the scope of the federal cause of action necessarily 'arises under' federal law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Glen Hanson, a Minor, by and Through His Guardian Ad Litem Catherine Hanson, Guardian Ad Litem Duane Hanson, Guardian Ad Litem v. The Prudential Insurance Co. Of America, Glen Hanson, a Minor, by and Through His Guardian Ad Litem Catherine Hanson, Guardian Ad Litem Duane Hanson v. The Prudential Insurance Co. Of America
“a preemption argument that affects the choice of forum rather than the choice of law is not waivable; thus, it can be raised for the first time on appeal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Glen Hanson, a Minor, by and Through His Guardian Ad Litem Catherine Hanson, Guardian Ad Litem Duane Hanson, Guardian Ad Litem v. The Prudential Insurance Co. Of America, Glen Hanson, a Minor, by and Through His Guardian Ad Litem Catherine Hanson, Guardian Ad Litem Duane Hanson v. The Prudential Insurance Co. Of America

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.