In re the Regents of the University of California’s Empirical Analysis
101 F.3d 1386 · 1996
Citation profile
28 federal appellate · 9 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 93 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably In re Seagate Technology, LLC (2007), United States v. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1997)
28 federal appellate · 9 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
Relies on Upjohn Company v. United States · Allied Chemical Corporation v. Daiflon Inc · Roche v. Evaporated Milk Ass'n · Schlagenhauf v. Holder · United Families of America v. Kendrick
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 93 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“because maintenance of the attorney-client privilege up to its proper limits has substantial importance to the administration of justice, and because an appeal after disclosure of the privileged communication is an inadequate remedy, the extraordinary remedy of mandamus is appropriate”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Accepting the scope of the attorney-client privilege is narrowly drawn in the Seventh Circuit, we conclude that the legal interest between Lilly and UC was substantially identical because of the potentially and ultimately exclusive nature of the Lilly-UC license agreement. Both parties had the same interest in obtaining strong and enforceable patents.... Lilly was more than a non-exclusive licensee, and shared the interest that UC would obtain valid and enforceable patents.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he petitioner has the burden of establishing that its right to the issuance of the writ is clear and indisputable, and that it lacks adequate alternative means to obtain the relief sought.”
2 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.