Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 900 F.2d 1247 - Lane v. Sullivan

Lane v. Sullivan’s Empirical Analysis

900 F.2d 1247 · 1990

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
2
states following
May 2013
most recently cited

20 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently May 2013 · most notably Harline v. Barker (1996), Gonzalez v. Moffitt (In Re Moffitt) (2000)

20 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

220199020002010decided

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 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Robertson v. Methow Valley Citizens Council · One Lot Emerald Cut Stones One Ring v. United States · Morgan v. United States · Path-Science Laboratories, Inc. v. Greene County Hospital

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

  1. “reveals that there is room for exception to the black letter law outlined above, although such exceptions are not suggested.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Although an issue is actually litigated and determined by a valid and final judgment, and the determination is essential to the judgment, relitigation of the issue in a subsequent action between the parties is not precluded in the following circumstances:”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “It is well settled under the collateral estoppel doctrine that four elements must exist to bar relitigation... (2) the issue must have been litigated in the prior action [and] (4) the determination must have been essential to the prior judgment.”
    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.