Maydak v. United States Department of Justice’s Empirical Analysis
218 F.3d 760 · 2000
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 59 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently April 2020 · most notably Citizens for Responsibility & Ethics in Washington v. United States Department of Justice (2014), Jefferson v. Department of Justice (2002)
15 federal appellate · 59 district · 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 United States Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press · National Labor Relations Board v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co. · United States Department of Justice v. Landano · Federal Trade Commission v. Grolier Inc. · Doe 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 89 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“as a general rule, [the government] must assert all exemptions at the same time, in the original district court proceedings,”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[1] where, from pure human error, the government failed to invoke the correct exemption and will have to release ihfor-mation compromising national security or sensitive, personal, private information unless the court allows it to make an untimely exemption claim; and [2] where a substantial change in the factual context of the case or an interim development in the applicable law forces the government to invoke an exemption after the original district court proceedings have concluded.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“prevent disclosures which might prematurely reveal the government's cases in court, its evidence and strategies, or the nature, scope, direction, and focus of its investigations, and thereby enable suspects to establish defenses or fraudulent alibis or to destroy or alter evidence.”
2 later decisions 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.