Sejman’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably United States v. Bell (1993), United States v. Aramony (1999)
4 federal appellate · 3 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
Relies on Arizona v. California · Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Federal Communications Commission · Kalb v. Feuerstein · Kalb v. Feuerstein · White v. Murtha
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““in all subsequent proceedings in the same case in the trial court or on a later appeal ... unless: (1) a subsequent trial produces substantially different evidence, (2) controlling authority has since made a contrary decision of law applicable to the issue, or (3) the prior decision was clearly erroneous and would work manifest injustice.””
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the totality of the circumstances, including the nature of the original contractual relationship between appellant and appellees.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Virginia M. Sejman A.R. Trautwein Thomas H. Givens Thomas J. McHugh Jr. Glenda Idle Roy G. Cook Joseph D. Dubuque C. Robert Reese Joe L. Norman Morris Leister Mary J. Miller Raymond G. Bernhardt Lewis Lathren, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Warner-Lambert Company, Inc., a Corporation, Thomas H. Givens M.L. Brannon John J. Caputo C.E. Robinson, Jr. v. Warner-Lambert Company, Inc. · Sejman“terminated by the Company as a result of job elimination, work performance, or other reasons of Company convenience”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Virginia M. Sejman A.R. Trautwein Thomas H. Givens Thomas J. McHugh Jr. Glenda Idle Roy G. Cook Joseph D. Dubuque C. Robert Reese Joe L. Norman Morris Leister Mary J. Miller Raymond G. Bernhardt Lewis Lathren, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Warner-Lambert Company, Inc., a Corporation, Thomas H. Givens M.L. Brannon John J. Caputo C.E. Robinson, Jr. v. Warner-Lambert Company, Inc. · Sejman
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.