Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 196 FRD 339 - Adams v. Ardcor

Adams v. Ardcor’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
2
states following
January 2010
most recently cited

2 state decisions

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 Upjohn Company v. United States · Trammel v. United States · Jaffee Special Administrator for Allen Deceased v. Redmond · Rhone-Poulenc Rorer Inc. v. Home Indemnity Co. · Garcia v. Zenith Electronics Corp.

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.

  1. “unacceptable because it would allow the privilege holder to thwart the truth-seeking process by using the privilege as both a shield and a sword.”
    1 later decision 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.