Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 146 F.3d 44 - Williams v. Drake

Williams v. Drake’s Empirical Analysis

146 F.3d 44 · 1998

Citation profile

61
cited by 61 later decisions
3
states following
June 2024
most recently cited

32 federal appellate · 8 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably United States v. Davis (2001), United States v. Lara (1999)

32 federal appellate · 8 district · 3 state decisions

2001998200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Massachusetts District Court)

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Lewis v. Gober · United States v. Sepulveda · McKinney v. Baldwin · Freeman v. Package Machinery Co. · United States v. Boylan

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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “bedrock rule of trial practice that, to preserve for appellate review a claim of error premised on the exclusion of evidence, the aggrieved party must ensure that the record sufficiently reflects the content of the proposed evidence,”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'[O]nly rarely - and in extraordinary circumstances - will we, from the vista of a cold appellate record, reverse a district court's on-the-spot judgment concerning the relative weighing of probative value and unfair effect.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “come close to [showing] the critical mass [of errors] necessary to cast a shadow upon the integrity of the verdict.”
    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.