Sales v. Rc Marshall Hunter’s Empirical Analysis
873 F.2d 115 · 1989
Citation profile
38 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 81 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably Health-Chem Corp. v. Baker (1990), Keweenaw Bay Indian Community v. Michigan (1993)
38 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
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. § 1651 · 28 U.S.C. § 1821 · 28 U.S.C. § 1915 · 28 U.S.C. § 1920 · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2243 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Crawford Fitting Company v. Jt Gibbons Inc Champion International Corporation · Gregory Lumber Co. v. United States · Truong Dinh Hung v. United States · Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Martin Exploration Management Co. · United States v. New York Telephone 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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“this court requires a determination of ... capacity to pay the costs assessed”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) Fees of the clerk and marshal; (2) Fees of the court reporter for all or any part of the stenographic transcript necessarily obtained for use in the case; (3) Fees and disbursements for printing and witnesses; (4) Fees for exemplification and copies of papers necessarily obtained for use in the case; (5) Docket fees under section 1923 of this title; (6) Compensation for court appointed experts, compensation of interpreters, and salaries, fees, expenses, and costs of special interpretation services under section 1928 of this title. A bill of costs shall be filed in the case and, upon allowance, included in the judgment or decree.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“... [Sjubsections (2) and (4) of § 1920 have been interpreted to authorize taxing as costs the expenses of taking, transcribing and reproducing depositions. Ordinarily, the costs of taking and transcribing depositions reasonably necessary for the litigation are allowed to the prevailing party. Necessity is deter mined at the time of taking, and the fact that a deposition is not actually used at trial is not controlling. An allowance of deposition costs is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.”
2 later decisions 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.