Worma v. Healey’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 921 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act)
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. · Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Califano v. Sanders · United States v. Salerno
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] statute will be held unconstitutionally vague 'only if it wholly fails to provide a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice of what is prohibited, or is so standardless that it authorizes or encourages seriously discriminatory enforcement.'); Pineda v. United States , No. 408CR02102HLMWEJ, 2016 WL 10428743 , at (N.D. Ga. Oct. 12, 2016) (observing that”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Heller ... presents us with a dispositive and relatively easy inquiry: Are the banned assault weapons and large-capacity magazines 'like' 'M-16 rifles,' i.e., 'weapons that are most useful in military service,' and thus outside the ambit of the Second Amendment?”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Worman v. Healey“We will affirm only if the record reveals 'that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Worman v. Healey
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.