Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 857 F.2d 20 - Roque v. United States

Roque v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

857 F.2d 20 · 1988

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
4
states following
February 2022
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently February 2022 · most notably Precision Etchings & Findings, Inc. v. LGP Gem, Ltd. (1992), Floyd v. United States (1990)

12 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions

20019881990200020102020decided

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 Messenger v. United States · Dora Pila, Administratrix, Etc. v. G. R. Leasing and Rental Corporation · Securities & Exchange Commission v. Beisinger Industries Corp. · Bolton v. Giuffrida

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

  1. “[i]f the true objection is insufficient service of process, we do not think it is too much to require a litigant to plainly say so”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “defense of [personal jurisdiction] is waived if not raised in the answer (or in a motion filed prior to or contemporaneously with the answer).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Rule 12(b) distinguishes between the defenses of lack of personal [jurisdiction] and insufficient service of process”
    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.