Jaffe v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
246 F.2d 760 · 1957
Citation profile
17 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2013 · most notably Coppedge v. United States (1962), Olen (Allen) Lee v. Nathan Habib, Olen Lee v. Nathan Habib (1970)
17 federal appellate ·
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.
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We are of course aware that a thorough decision whether there was a substantial question would depend upon a scrutiny of the whole record; so that, speaking literally, we could not adequately decide the motion until after we had granted it. Plainly, therefore, we must proceed upon what the motion papers contain, and they state only bare conclusions. Thrown back upon these we hold that the contents of the record as therein stated do not appear in enough detail to support the motion.” Id. at 762 .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(f)ees for transcripts furnished in other proceedings (civil actions such as this) to persons permitted to appeal in forma pauperis shall also be paid by the United States if the trial judge or a circuit judge certifies that the appeal is not frivolous (but presents a substantial question).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““An appeal may not be frivolous under the ‘good faith’ test of Section 1915 and Rule 24 ‘good faith,’ and yet may be frivolous as not presenting a ‘substantial question’ for the purposes of Section 753(f). ‘An appeal not taken in “good faith” as described in § 1915(a) is not the same as a “frivolous” appeal, for bad faith imports a consciousness of frivolity as distinct from frivolity, simpliciter.’ ””
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.