Survival Systems of Whittaker Corp v. United States District Court for Southern District of California’s Empirical Analysis
825 F.2d 1416 · 1987
Citation profile
48 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently September 2009 · most notably Ethridge V. Harbor House Restaurant (1988), Executive Software North America, Inc. v. United States District Court for the Central District of California (1994)
48 federal appellate · 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. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447 · 28 U.S.C. § 1651
Relies on Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · Will v. United States · Thermtron Products, Inc. v. Hermansdorfer · Farmer v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Local 25 · Bauman v. United States District Court
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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“resolve[ ] the merits of a matter of substantive law apart from any jurisdictional decision,”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“When the district court's order is correct as a matter of law, it is obvious that the writ of mandamus should not be issued.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The ruling of the district court was that appellants' remaining state causes of action were not artfully pleaded federal claims that were preempted by federal law. This ruling does not finally resolve the issues of preemption, which may still be raised as a defense in state court. Thus ... the defense of preemption could be sustained. Therefore, the only issue decided by the district court was jurisdictional, and review by appeal is not available.”
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.