Maddox v. Patterson’s Empirical Analysis
905 F.2d 1178 · 1990
Citation profile
28 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently March 2010 · most notably United Healthcare Corp. v. American Trade Insurance (1996), United States v. Kehoe (2002)
28 federal appellate ·
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 Crimm v. Missouri Pacific Railroad · Roth v. Black & Decker, U.S., Inc. · Haynes v. American Motors Corp. · Kontz v. K-Mart Corp.
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A trial judge has wide discretion in ruling on the admissibility of evidence, and his decisions will not be disturbed unless there is a clear and prejudicial abuse of discretion.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“[i]t is clearly within the trial court's discretion to exclude evidence sua sponte”
1 later decision 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.