Fj Hanshaw Enterprises Inc Frederick Hanshaw v. Emerald River Development Inc Gordon Richard a Marshack’s Empirical Analysis
244 F.3d 1128 · 2001
Citation profile
37 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Yahoo! Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et L'Antisemitisme (2006), In Re Thomas James Dyer (2003)
37 federal appellate · 5 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 Apprendi v. New Jersey · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Davis v. Alaska · Berger v. United States · Liteky et al 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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“when a court uses its inherent powers to impose sanctions that are criminal in nature, it must provide the same due process protections that would be available in a criminal contempt proceeding”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“$5,000, at least in 1989 dollars, is the cutoff for a serious fine warranting a jury trial.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Although contempt and sanctions are not identical, the principles the Supreme Court articulated for cases of contempt in Int'l Union, United Mine Workers of Am. v. Bagwell, 512 U.S. 821 , 114 S.Ct. 2552, 129 L.Ed.2d 642 (1994), guide our determination of what procedural protections are necessary in imposing sanctions under a court's inherent powers.”
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.