Holt v. Facebook, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1367 · 47 U.S.C. § 227
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Chadha · Frisby v. Schultz · Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[d]o-not-call lists would also not be a plausible less restrictive alternative because placing the burden on consumers to opt-out of intrusive calls, rather than requiring consumers to opt-in, would obviously not be as effective in achieving residential privacy.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he TCPA does not restrict individuals from receiving any content they want to receive-speech that would otherwise be prohibited by the TCPA is immediately removed from the purview of the statute once express consent is provided.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“equipment which has the capacity-(A) to store or produce telephone numbers to be called, using a random or sequential number generator; and (B) to dial such numbers.”
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.