Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 845 F.2d 750 - Fred Smith Lumber Company v. Edidin

Fred Smith Lumber Company v. Edidin’s Empirical Analysis

845 F.2d 750 · 1988

Citation profile

70
cited by 70 later decisions
2
states following
July 2019
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably Hays v. Sony Corporation of America (1988), Kapco Manufacturing Co., Inc. v. C & O Enterprises, Inc. (1989)

18 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

2901988199020002010decided

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 Doyle v. Ohio · Szabo Food Service, Inc. v. Canteen Corp. · Morgan v. Bank of Waukegan · Hill v. Norfolk and Western Railway Company · Brown v. Federation of State Medical Boards

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

  1. “[W]hether the signer of the documents had sufficient time for investigation; the extent to which the attorney had to rely on his or her client for the factual foundation underlying the pleading, motion, or other paper; whether the case was accepted from another attorney; the complexity of the facts and the attorney’s ability to do a sufficient pre-filing investigation; and whether discovery would have been beneficial to the development of the underlying facts.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Rule 11 imposes an affirmative duty of reasonable investigation on an attorney signing any paper.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “multiplies the proceedings ... unreasonably and vexatiously,”
    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.