VARDJAN’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently July 2006
2 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
Applies 22 U.S.C. § 841 · 8 U.S.C. § 1251 (§ 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Dunat v. Hurney · Branyan v. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij · 198 F. Supp. 483 - United States Lines Company v. EJ Lavino & Company · 107 F. Supp. 605 - Sang Ryup Park v. Barber · United States v. Ausmeier
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a letter rogatory shall be issued on application and notice and on terms that are just and appropriate.”
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.