Hewlett 87-1384 v. Davis’s Empirical Analysis
844 F.2d 109 · 1988
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently June 2016 · most notably Osei-Afriyie v. Medical College of Pennsylvania (1991), Anderson v. Wachovia Mortgage Corp. (2010)
12 federal appellate · 2 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. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Link v. Wabash Railroad · Carnegie-Mellon University v. Cohill · National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, Inc. · Thermtron Products, Inc. v. Hermansdorfer
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Within fourteen (14) days after filing any post-trial motion, the movant shall either (a) order a transcript of the trial by a writing delivered to the Court Reporter Supervisor, or (b) file a verified motion showing good cause to be excused from this requirement. Unless a transcript is thus ordered, or the movant excused from ordering a transcript, the post-trial motion may be dismissed for lack of prosecution.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The power to dismiss for failure to prosecute, which may be exercised with or without notice or opportunity to be heard, rests in the discretion of the trial court and is part of its inherent authority to prevent undue delays in the disposition of pending cases and to avoid congestion in its docket. Link v. Wabash Railroad Co., 370 U.S. 626 , 629-30 (1962). Local rules are promulgated to facilitate the court's acquistion of the materials necessary for the efficient processing of the matters on its docket. A district court has the authority to provide for the ultimate sanction of dismissal for noncompliance with local court rules. Smith v. Delanschlager, No. 87-1552 (3d Cir. Mar. 8, 1988); Hall v. C.I.R., (Dept. of Treasury), 805 F.2d 1511 (11th Cir.1986). Dismissal for failure to prosecute is reviewable only for an abuse of discretion. Sauers v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 771 F.2d 64 (3d Cir.1985), cert. denied --- U.S. ----, 106 S.Ct. 2286 (1986).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[o]bjections to [jury instructions given] at trial are ripe for review upon appeal from a final order whether or not they are raised on motion for a new trial.”
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.