Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 849 F.2d 639 - Bledsoe v. Crowley

Bledsoe v. Crowley’s Empirical Analysis

849 F.2d 639 · 1988

Citation profile

53
cited by 53 later decisions
1
states following
February 2014
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 28 district · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently February 2014 · most notably Huss v. Gayden (2009), Rafferty v. Nynex Corp. (1995)

11 federal appellate · 28 district · 10 state decisions

2101988199020002010decided

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. § 294 · 28 U.S.C. § 636

Relies on Erie Co v. Tompkins · Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co. · Hanna v. Plumer · Guaranty Trust Co. v. York · Landis v. North American 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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “evaluate the governmental policies underlying the applicable conflicting laws and ... determine which jurisdiction's policy would be most advanced by having its law applied to the facts of the case under review.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The District Court resolved the conflict in favor of the application of Maryland law by determining that Maryland, through passage of the arbitration statute, had manifested a strong public policy concerning the manner in which malpractice claims should be resolved. It found that the District of Columbia, by contrast, had expressed no such interest, because it had adopted no legislation on the subject. The District Court thus decided that there was no true conflict, and that since no other factor outweighed Maryland’s strong interest, Maryland law should be applied.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Where each state would have an interest in application of its own law to the facts ... the law of the jurisdiction with the stronger interest will apply.”
    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.