Minnesota v. Keeley’s Empirical Analysis
126 F.2d 863 · 1942
Citation profile
2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently June 2001
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
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 1589
Relies on United States v. Wiltberger · Panhandle Oil Co. v. Mississippi ex rel. Knox · David Wilkinson v. Thomas Leland · Jordan v. Roche · Bailey Collector v. Clark et al.
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A purely legalistic focus, derived from artificial canons of construction, ought not, to be allowed to blot out a patent remedial intent, if there is no abortive violence to the language which Congress has used.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re Hughes“located on United States military or other reservations”
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.