Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 19 I&NDEC 628 - BUSCEMI

BUSCEMI’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
August 2016
most recently cited

35 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably Tipu v. Immigration & Naturalization Service (1994), Paredes-Urrestarazu v. U.S. Immigration & Naturalization Service (1994)

35 federal appellate ·

3601988199020002010decided

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 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1251 (§ 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on Francis v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

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

  1. “[a]s the negative factors grow more serious, it becomes incumbent upon the alien to introduce additional offsetting favorable evidence, which in some cases may have to involve unusual or outstanding equities.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “merely satisfies the threshold test for having a favorable exercise of discretion considered in his case; such a showing does not compel that discretion be exercised in his favor.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “will ordinarily be required to make a showing of rehabilitation before relief will be considered as a matter of discretion.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.