Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 885 F.2d 795 - Grant v. Preferred Research, Inc.

Grant v. Preferred Research, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

885 F.2d 795 · 1989

Citation profile

68
cited by 68 later decisions
1
states following
November 2018
most recently cited

28 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 68 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably Venters v. City of Delphi (1997), Robinson v. Johnson (2002)

28 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions

2701989199020002010decided

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 Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois Foundation · The Boeing Company v. Daniel C. Shipman · Sunkist Growers, Inc. v. Winckler & Smith Citrus Products Co. · American National Bank of Jacksonville v. Federal Deposit Insurance · Kicklighter v. Nails by Jannee, 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 68 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The Supreme Court has held that the purpose of Rule 8(c) is to give the opposing party notice of the affirmative defense and a chance to rebut it.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[w]hen the jury delivers a verdict based upon several possible grounds, one of which ... was improperly submitted to the jury, and the appellate court has no means of determining on what basis the jury reached its verdict, the verdict must be reversed and remanded.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “In pleading to a preceding pleading, a party shall set forth affirmatively ... fraud ... and any other matter constituting an avoidance or affirmative defense.”
    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.