Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 835 F.2d 580 - Northshore Development, Inc. v. Lee

Northshore Development, Inc. v. Lee’s Empirical Analysis

835 F.2d 580 · 1988

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
October 2020
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently October 2020 · most notably Beighley v. Federal Deposit Insurance (1989), Goldin v. Bartholow (1999)

14 federal appellate · 3 district ·

20019881990200020102020decided

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 12 U.S.C. § 1464 (Consumer Home Mortgage Assistance Act of 1974)

Relies on United States v. Munsingwear, Inc. · Ackermann v. United States · Japan Whaling Ass'n v. American Cetacean Society · Seven Elves, Inc. v. Eskenazi · Great Western Sugar Co. v. Nelson

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

  1. “[N]o law has been cited to me where I would have jurisdiction to vacate a Louisiana court’s judgment. Sure, I have power to vacate my own judgment. If I were on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, the United States Fifth Circuit Court, [I would have] the power to vacate District Court judgments, but you are talking about two entirely different systems.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a motions panel decision is not binding precedent”). 27 . Indeed, the instant case is clearly a fortiori of Ross. In Ross, the Court was dealing with an action — a stockholders' derivative suit — which was historically equitable and which was fairly described as a”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “... a district court should grant a motion under section 6 of Rule 60(b) only to accomplish justice or in extraordinary circumstances.”
    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.