Data General Corp. v. Grumman Systems Support Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 17 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently July 2017 · most notably Data General Corporation v. Grumman Systems Support Corporation (1994), 184 Cal. App. 4th 210 - Silvaco Data Systems v. Intel Corp. (2010)
4 federal appellate · 17 district · 4 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 17 U.S.C. § 408 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 17 U.S.C. § 410 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 17 U.S.C. § 411 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 17 U.S.C. § 504 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976)
Relies on Bibby v. United States · Browning-Ferris Industries of Vermont, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc. · Roemer v. United States · Waldschmidt v. Ranier · Freeman v. Package Machinery 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Based on an Objection at Trial. If, at trial, a party objects that evidence is not within the issues raised in the pleadings, the court may permit the pleadings to be amended. The court should freely permit an amendment when doing so will aid in presenting the merits and the objecting party fails to satisfy the court that the evidence would prejudice that party's action or defense on the merits. The court may grant a continuance to enable the objecting party to meet the evidence. (2) For Issues Tried by Consent. When an issue not raised by the pleadings is tried by the parties' express or implied consent, it must be treated in all respects as if raised in the pleadings. A party may moveat any time, even after judgmentto amend the pleadings to conform them to the evidence and to raise an unpleaded issue. But failure to amend does not affect the result of the trial of that issue.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[W]here the motion to amend comes after responsive pleadings have been served, the standard for adding a party is the same whether the motion is made under Rule 15 or Rule 21 because in both cases the moving party must demonstrate an absence of prejudice to the nonmoving party.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[a]cquisition of a trade secret is wrongful ... if it is by theft of property known to belong to another, or by knowing participation in the breach of an express or implied confidentiality agreement by, for instance, a former employee or customer of Data General.”
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.