Fogleman v. Aramco (Arabian American Oil Co.)’s Empirical Analysis
920 F.2d 278 · 1991
Citation profile
35 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 97 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably Migis v. Pearle Vision, Inc. (1998), Allen Breaux and Joe Ambrogio v. City of Garland et al. (2000)
35 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 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 28 U.S.C. § 1920
Relies on Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno · Lauritzen v. Larsen · Crawford Fitting Company v. Jt Gibbons Inc Champion International Corporation · Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. · Ohio State Board of Education v. Reed
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 97 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Rjeproductions necessarily obtained for use in the case are included within taxable costs, provided that the prevailing party demonstrates that necessity.... While we certainly do not expect a prevailing party to identify every xerox copy made for use in the course of legal proceedings, we do require some demonstration that reproduction costs necessarily result from that litigation.... [Defendants] should be taxed for the cost of reproducing relevant documents and exhibits for use in the case, but should not be held responsible for multiple copies of documents, attorney correspondence, or any of the other multitude of papers that may pass through a law firm’s xerox machines.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he significance of each factor in a nontraditional maritime context like offshore oil production may vary from that in the traditional shipping context in which the Lauritzen-Rhoditis test arose.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'it is the base from which the rig is operated on a day-to-day basis rather than the base of operations of the corporate or ultimate owner of the rig which is important for choice of law purposes.'”
3 later decisions 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.