Featherston v. Goldman’s Empirical Analysis
843 F.2d 596 · 1988
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 11 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably Cruz v. Savage (1990), Anderson v. McGowan (In Re Anderson) (1991)
14 federal appellate · 11 district ·
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. § 1927
Relies on Commissioner v. Engle · Eastway Construction Corp. v. City of New York · Akers v. United States · Israel v. Futuronics Corp. · United States v. Marathon Pipe Line 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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) Signing of papers Every petition, pleading, written motion, and other paper, except a list, schedule, or statement, or amendments thereto, shall be signed by at least one attorney of record in the attorney’s individual name. A party who is not represented by an attorney shall sign all papers. Each paper shall state the signer’s ad dress and telephone number, if any. An unsigned paper shall be stricken unless omission of the signature is corrected promptly after being called to the attention of the attorney or party. (b) Representations to the court By presenting to the court (whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating) a petition, pleading, written motion, or other paper, an attorney or unrepresented party is certifying that to the best of the person’s knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances,— (1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation; (2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law; (3) the allegations and other factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and (4) the denials of factual ”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“to conduct [themselves] in a manner bespeaking reasonable professionalism and consistent with the orderly functioning of the judicial system,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“... trier of fact has broad discretion in deciding whether counsel acted responsibly ...”
2 later decisions 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.