Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 876 F.3d 384 - Development Specialists, Inc. v. Kaplan

Development Specialists, Inc. v. Kaplan’s Empirical Analysis

876 F.3d 384 · 2017

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
May 2020
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Relies on Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Palmacci v. Umpierrez · Brandt v. Repco Printers & Lithographics, Inc. · TEC Engineering Corp. v. Budget Molders Supply, 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “If a trial court's findings are too meager to allow review, the decision has run afoul of [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure] 52(a), and the appropriate remedy is a remand for further fact-finding.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “plainly does not entitle a reviewing court to reverse the finding of the trier of fact simply because it is convinced -15- that it would have decided the case differently.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Deference to the findings of the bankruptcy court is especially appropriate where a determination depends upon an assessment of credibility”
    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.