United States v. Eubanks’s Empirical Analysis
169 F.3d 672 · 1999
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently May 2017
5 federal appellate · 1 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 No. 89-7682 Non-Argument Calendar · Averhart v. United States · United States v. Watkins
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is inappropriate for a court to exercise equitable jurisdiction to review the merits of a forfeiture matter when the petitioner elected to forego the procedures for pursuing an adequate remedy at law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The decision to invoke equitable jurisdiction is highly discretionary and must be exercised with caution and restraint.”
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.