Keith v. Aldridge’s Empirical Analysis

900 F.2d 736 · 1990

Citation profile

109

cited by 109 later decisions

states following

April 2023

most recently cited

34 federal appellate · 4 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 109 later decisions — most recently April 2023 · most notably Herrmann v. Cencom Cable Associates, Inc. (1993), Anne Arundel County Board of Education v. Norville (2005)

34 federal appellate · 4 district · 7 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 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 704 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 5 U.S.C. § 552A (§ 3 of the Privacy Act of 1974) · 5 U.S.C. § 7701

Relies on Nash County Board of Education v. Biltmore Co. · Harnett v. Billman · Hostetter v. United States · Medina v. Wood River Pipeline 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 109 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

“'(1) a final judgment on the merits in an earlier suit, (2) an identity of the cause of action in both the earlier and the later suit, and (3) an identity of parties or their privies in the two suits.'”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Harms v. United States America · Old White Charities, Inc. v. Bankers Ins., LLC
“'the appropriate inquiry is whether the new claim arises out of the same transaction or series of transactions as the claim resolved by the prior judgment.'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Harms v. United States America · Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation v. Prince George Joint Venture
“[t]he parties have agreed in terms or in effect that the plaintiff may split his claim, or the defendant has acquiesced therein ....”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Calabria v. CIT Consumer Group (In Re Calabria) · Bill Greever Corp. v. Tazewell National Bank

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.