Bohus v. Beloff’s Empirical Analysis
950 F.2d 919 · 1991
Citation profile
33 federal appellate · 12 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 163 later decisions — most recently March 2026 · most notably Oshiver v. Levin, Fishbein, Sedran & Berman (1994), Lower Lake Erie Iron Ore Antitrust Litigation Wills Trucking Inc (1993)
33 federal appellate · 12 district · 10 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
Relies on Carnegie v. United States · Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Estate J Bosch Second National Bank of New Haven · Scharffe v. Perkins · California v. ARC America Corp. · Kliewer v. New Jersey
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 163 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b); (3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied, released or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or (6) any other reason that justifies relief.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“the plaintiff reasonably knows, or reasonably should know: (1) that he has been injured, and (2) that his injury has been caused by another party's conduct.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gurfein v. Sovereign Group · In Re: Mushroom Transportation Company, Inc., Debtor. Jeoffrey Burtch Mushroom Transportation Co., Inc. Penn York Realty Company, Inc. Robbey Realty Inc. Trux Enterprises Teamsters Pension Trust Fund of Philadelphia Charles J. Schaffer, Jr. William J. Einhorn Raymond A. Huber Hubert C. Dietrich Robert J. Ewanco William D. Gross Thomas R. Johnston Joseph P. Santone William J. Dillner, Jr. James H. Hutchinson, Jr. John P. O'COnnOr Anthony R. Simones Freight Drivers & Helpers Local 557 Pension Fund Daniel L. Sandy v. Jonathan H. Ganz Pincus Verlin Hahn & Reich, P.C. Pincus Reich Hahn Dubroff & Ganz, P.C. Modell Pincus Hahn & Reich, P.C. Pincus Verlin Bluestein Hahn & Reich, P.C. Astor Weiss & Newman Rawle & Henderson Continental Bank Erwin L. Pincus Richard L. Hahn Pace Reich Jerome J. Verlin Andrew F. Napoli Ronald Bluestein Herman P. Weinberg David N. Bressler Allen B. Dubroff Jeoffrey Burtch, Trustee in Bankruptcy of Mushroom Transportation Company, Inc., Successor to Robbey Realty, Inc., Penn York Realty Company, Inc., and Trux Enterprises, Inc. And Successor to Michael Arnold, Former Trustee in Bankruptcy, Mushroom Transportation Company, Inc., Robbey Realty, Inc., Penn York Realty Company, Inc., and Trux Enterprises, Inc., the Teamsters Pension Trust Fund of Philadelphia and Vicinity, Charles J. Schaffer, Jr., in His Official Capacity as a Fiduciary, by His Successor in Office, William J. Einhorn, Raymond A. Huber, Herbert C. Dietrich, Robert J. Ewanco, William D. Gross, Thomas R. Johnston, Joseph P. Santone, William J. Dillner, Jr., James H. Hutchinson, Jr., John P. O'COnnOr and Anthony R. Simones, Trustees of the Western Pennsylvania, Teamsters and Employers Pension Fund or Their Successors, and Freight Drivers & Helpers Local 557 Pension Fund and Daniel L. Sandy, a Fiduciary, or His Successor and Any Other Named or Deemed Substituted (By Virtue of His Office) or Other Successor“`reasonable diligence' in ascertaining the existence of the injury and its cause.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re: Mushroom Transportation Company, Inc., Debtor. Jeoffrey Burtch Mushroom Transportation Co., Inc. Penn York Realty Company, Inc. Robbey Realty Inc. Trux Enterprises Teamsters Pension Trust Fund of Philadelphia Charles J. Schaffer, Jr. William J. Einhorn Raymond A. Huber Hubert C. Dietrich Robert J. Ewanco William D. Gross Thomas R. Johnston Joseph P. Santone William J. Dillner, Jr. James H. Hutchinson, Jr. John P. O'COnnOr Anthony R. Simones Freight Drivers & Helpers Local 557 Pension Fund Daniel L. Sandy v. Jonathan H. Ganz Pincus Verlin Hahn & Reich, P.C. Pincus Reich Hahn Dubroff & Ganz, P.C. Modell Pincus Hahn & Reich, P.C. Pincus Verlin Bluestein Hahn & Reich, P.C. Astor Weiss & Newman Rawle & Henderson Continental Bank Erwin L. Pincus Richard L. Hahn Pace Reich Jerome J. Verlin Andrew F. Napoli Ronald Bluestein Herman P. Weinberg David N. Bressler Allen B. Dubroff Jeoffrey Burtch, Trustee in Bankruptcy of Mushroom Transportation Company, Inc., Successor to Robbey Realty, Inc., Penn York Realty Company, Inc., and Trux Enterprises, Inc. And Successor to Michael Arnold, Former Trustee in Bankruptcy, Mushroom Transportation Company, Inc., Robbey Realty, Inc., Penn York Realty Company, Inc., and Trux Enterprises, Inc., the Teamsters Pension Trust Fund of Philadelphia and Vicinity, Charles J. Schaffer, Jr., in His Official Capacity as a Fiduciary, by His Successor in Office, William J. Einhorn, Raymond A. Huber, Herbert C. Dietrich, Robert J. Ewanco, William D. Gross, Thomas R. Johnston, Joseph P. Santone, William J. Dillner, Jr., James H. Hutchinson, Jr., John P. O'COnnOr and Anthony R. Simones, Trustees of the Western Pennsylvania, Teamsters and Employers Pension Fund or Their Successors, and Freight Drivers & Helpers Local 557 Pension Fund and Daniel L. Sandy, a Fiduciary, or His Successor and Any Other Named or Deemed Substituted (By Virtue of His Office) or Other Successor · Debiec v. Cabot Corp.
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.