Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 237 F.3d 657 - In re Sealed Case

In re Sealed Case’s Empirical Analysis

237 F.3d 657 · 2001

Citation profile

49
cited by 49 later decisions
July 2020
most recently cited

20 federal appellate · 12 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently July 2020 · most notably American Federation of Labor & Congress of Industrial Organizations v. Federal Election Commission (2003), Jessup v. Luther (2002)

20 federal appellate · 12 district ·

280200120102020decided

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 Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation · Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay · Catlin v. United States · Auer v. Robbins

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

  1. “Any notification or investigation made under this section shall not be made public by the Commission or by any person without the written consent of the person receiving such notification or the person with respect to whom such investigation is made.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The plain language of these provisions and the overall purpose and structure of the statutory scheme create a strong confidentiality interest analogous to that protected by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e)(6). In both contexts, se crecy is vital “to protect [an] innocent accused who is exonerated from disclosure of the fact that he has been under investigation.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “We cannot fathom why the FEC's issuance of a subpoena in furtherance of an ongoing investigation would not be considered part of that `investigation' within the meaning of § 437g.”
    3 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.