Reid v. Charney’s Empirical Analysis
235 F.2d 47 · 1956
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently July 1986 · most notably United States v. Acres of Land More or Less Situated in Klickitat County State of Washington (1986), Watson v. Moss (1980)
16 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 28 U.S.C. § 1915
Relies on Adkins v. E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. · Goldsby v. United States · Austin v. United States · 98 F. Supp. 6 - United States v. Kinzer
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In contrast to a criminal proceeding, in which the court has a duty to ‘a*. SÍ9%’ counsel to rePresent a defendant in accordance with his Constitutional right> Rule 44> Federal Rules of Crim_ inal procedure, 18 U.S.C.A., the court in a civil case has the statutory power only to ‘request an attorney to repre sgwf & perg(m unable to employ coun. sel. Title 28 U.S.C.A. § 1915 (d).” (Emphasis in cited opinion)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * Even in a criminal ease, where it is the district court’s clear duty to order that subpoenas be issued upon the request of an indigent defendant at the cost of the government, that duty is not absolute. Rule 17(b), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The court's action upon such requests is generally not reviewable in the absence of an abuse of discretion. See Goldsby v. United States, 1895, 160 U.S. 70 , 16 S.Ct. 216 , 40 L.Ed. 343 ; Austin v. United States, 9 Cir. 1927, 19 F.2d 127 ; United States v. Kinzer, D.C.D.C.1951, 98 F.Supp. 6 . Certainly no less discretion was allowable to the district court in this civil action, whatever the court’s power may have been. Cf. Adkins v. E. I. DuPont De Nemours & Co., 1947, 335 U.S. 331 , 337, 69 S.Ct. 85 , 93 L.Ed. 43 .” Reid v. Charney, 6 Cir., 1956, 235 F.2d 47 , 48.”
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.