ApolloMedia Corp. v. Reno’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1461 · 18 U.S.C. § 1462 · 18 U.S.C. § 1464 · 18 U.S.C. § 1465 · 19 U.S.C. § 1305 (Tariff Act of 1930) · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 2001 · 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Relies on Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc. · Elrod v. Burns · Flast v. Cohen · Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization · Hamling v. United States
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“makes a telephone call or utilizes a telecommunications device, whether or not conversation or communication ensues, without disclosing his identity and with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person at the called number or who receives the communications.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“any comment, request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other communication which is obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, or indecent, with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass another person.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“whether § 223(a)(1)(A)(ii) and § 223(a)(2) proscribe communications that are 'indecent' as opposed to only those that are 'obscene.'”
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.