Regional Refuse Systems, Inc. v. Inland Reclamation Co.’s Empirical Analysis
842 F.2d 150 · 1988
Citation profile
69 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 132 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably Amernational Industries, Inc. v. Action-Tungsram, Inc. (1991), Bank One of Cleveland, N.A. v. Abbe (1990)
69 federal appellate · 2 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 15 U.S.C. § 1 (§ 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866)
Relies on National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, Inc. · Reginald R. Brinkmann, Jr. v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner · Eastway Construction Corp. v. City of New York · Connell Construction Co. v. Plumbers & Steamfitters Local Union No. 100 · Oliveri v. Thompson
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 132 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'Dismissal of an action for failure to cooperate in discovery is a sanction of last resort that may be imposed only if the court concludes that a party's failure to cooperate in discovery is due to willfulness, bad faith, or fault.'”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) whether the adversary was prejudiced by the dismissed party's failure to cooperate in discovery, (2) whether the dismissed party was warned that failure to cooperate could lead to dismissal, and (3) whether less drastic sanctions were imposed or considered before dismissal was ordered.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“(1) whether the party’s [conduct] [was] due to willfulness, bad faith, or fault; (2) whether the adversary was prejudiced by the dismissed party’s conduct; (3) whether the dismissed party was warned that failure to cooperate could lead to dismissal; and (4) whether less drastic sanctions were imposed or considered before dismissal was ordered.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.