Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 852 F.2d 1074 - Smith v. Ferrel

Smith v. Ferrel’s Empirical Analysis

852 F.2d 1074 · 1988

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
September 2014
most recently cited

10 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently September 2014 · most notably Pulla v. Amoco Oil Co. (1995), Jurgens v. McKasy (1991)

10 federal appellate ·

2001988199020002010decided

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. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 636

Relies on Palmer v. Hoffman · Mobil Alaska Pipeline Co. v. United States · Rosenau Ex Rel. Rosenau v. City of Estherville · Harris v. Zurich Insurance · Myers v. Norfolk Livestock Market, Inc.

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

  1. “Were Floyd Jay Ferrel or Shirley M. Ferrel, doing business as Lakeside Manor Park negligent?”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.