130 F. Supp. 2d 1370 - Conner v. Tate’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2511 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2520 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2701 (§ 201 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2702 (§ 201 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2707 (§ 201 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986)
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Malley v. Briggs · Associated General Contractors of California, Inc. v. California State Council of Carpenters · In re Martin-Trigona
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“any employee, or agent of the United States or any State or political subdivision thereof, and any individual, partnership, association, joint stock company, trust or corporation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“an electronic communication service to the public,”
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.