Lockette v. Greyhound Lines, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
817 F.2d 1182 · 1987
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably Vaughn v. Edel (1990), Carter v. South Central Bell (1990)
20 federal appellate · 5 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. § 636
Relies on Gilbert v. First National Bank of Jackson · Potter Instrument Co. v. Storage Technology Corp. · State v. Theriot · Lee v. Hunt H L · Fritiofson v. Alexander
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[qjuestions regarding the enforceability of settlement agreements in diversity cases are governed by state law.” Id. at 1547 (emphasis added); see also Lockette v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 817 F.2d 1182, 1185 (5th Cir.1987) ("In this case, where jurisdiction is based upon diversity of citizenship, we will apply the substantive law of Louisiana to determine whether the settlement agreement allegedly entered into between Lockette and Greyhound is enforceable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Although federal courts possess the inherent power to enforce agreements entered into in settlement of litigation, the construction and enforcement of settlement agreements is governed by the principles of state law applicable to contracts generally,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A judicial confession is a declaration made by a party in a judicial proceeding. That confession constitutes full proof against the party who made it.' A judicial confession is indivisible and it may be revoked only on the ground of error of fact.”
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.