Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 956 F.2d 149 - Kaplan v. Zenner

Kaplan v. Zenner’s Empirical Analysis

956 F.2d 149 · 1992

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
2
states following
November 2016
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently November 2016 · most notably Otis v. City of Chicago (1994), Divane v. Krull Electric Co. (1999)

18 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

190199220002010decided

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. § 1291

Relies on Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson · Kuntz v. City of Dayton · Brendale v. Confederated Tribes & Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation · Eli Lilly & Co. v. Medtronic, Inc. · Szabo Food Service, Inc. v. Canteen 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[W]here appropriate, [Rule 11] motions should be filed.. .as soon as practicable after discovery of a Rule 11 violation.”); Price v. Hawaii (D.Haw.1992) 789 F.Supp. 330, 335-336 (”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “outer parameters of the timeliness for sanctions claims.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “A party seeking sanctions should give notice to the court and the offending party promptly upon discovering a basis for doing so. The time when sanctions are to be imposed rests in the discretion of the trial judge. However, it is anticipated that in the case of pleadings the sanctions issue under Rule 11 normally will be determined at the end of the litigation, and in the case of motions at the time when the motion is decided or shortly thereafter.”
    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.