Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 954 F.2d 434 - Burda v. M. Ecker Co.

Burda v. M. Ecker Co.’s Empirical Analysis

954 F.2d 434 · 1992

Citation profile

73
cited by 73 later decisions
2
states following
February 2015
most recently cited

37 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 73 later decisions — most recently February 2015 · most notably Jass v. Prudential Health Care Plan, Inc. (1996), Doe v. Allied-Signal, Inc. (1993)

37 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

480199220002010decided

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 Franchise Tax Board of the State of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California · Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp. · Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams · Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Taylor · Avco Corporation v. Aero Lodge No 735 International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers

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

  1. “Burda I "). This court remanded for reconsideration of the judgment imposing sanctions because the district court's order resulted in imposition of sanctions only against Burda, who was merely a nominal party to the action. Id. at 440. While recognizing that the district court could not impose Rule 11 sanctions on Stelzman because only Flaxman had signed pleadings filed in federal court, we noted that there was "little doubt that the target of the sanctions was Stelzman--whose personal interest in the litigation appeared to precipitate the actions for which sanctions were imposed.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “) in the amount of $8525.78 that was approved by the Illinois Industrial Commission. From the total amount, $1705.16 was deducted for Stelzman's attorney's fee and $230.00 was deducted for a doctor's report and X-rays. Burda was to receive the remaining $6590.62. 3 Before disbursing the settlement checks, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “presence or absence of federal-question jurisdiction is governed by the 'well-pleaded complaint rule,' which provides that federal jurisdiction exists only when a federal question is presented on the face of the plaintiff's properly pleaded complaint.”
    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.