Amoco Oil Co. v. Johnstone’s Empirical Analysis
856 F.2d 967 · 1988
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently September 2011
5 federal appellate · 1 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 15 U.S.C. § 2802 · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Relies on Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore · Sloan v. Hicks · McSurely v. McClellan · County of Cook v. Midcon Corp. · Wickham Contracting Co. v. Board of Education
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“1) the party against whom the estoppel is asserted was a party to the prior adjudication; 2) the issues which form the basis of the estoppel were actually litigated and decided on the merits in the prior suit; 3) the resolution of the particular issues was necessary to the court’s judgment; and 4) those issues are identical to issues raised in the subsequent suit.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he district court found ample jurisdiction to hear the case under the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2801-2841 (PMPA); the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201; and by reason of diversity, 28 U.S.C. § 1332.”
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.