Castaneda v. Falcon’s Empirical Analysis
166 F.3d 799 · 1999
Citation profile
19 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently February 2024 · most notably Goonsuwan v. Ashcroft (2001), Giles v. NYLCare Health Plans, Inc. (1999)
19 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 28 U.S.C. § 636
Relies on Griffith v. Oles · Collins v. Foreman · Geras v. Lafayette Display Fixtures, Inc. · Trufant v. Autocon, Inc. · Grimes v. City and County of San Francisco Grimes
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We must always be sure of our appellate jurisdiction and, if there is a doubt, we must address it, sua sponte if necessary.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The prevailing view is that a magistrate lacks the power to adjudicate contempt proceedings; pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (e), a magistrate may only certify to the district court (or deny certification thereof) facts possibly constituting contempt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“we are without jurisdiction unless and until the district court acts and a proper notice of appeal is filed from whatever action the district court might take.”
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.