Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 329 U.S. 495 - Hickman v. Taylor

Hickman v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis

329 U.S. 495 · 1947

Citation profile

9,505
cited by 9,505 later decisions
51
cited 51 times by the Supreme Court
50
states following
February 2026
most recently cited

1,341 federal appellate · 1,672 district · 2,206 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9,505 later decisions (51 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2026 · most notably Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (2007), Upjohn Company v. United States (1981)

1,341 federal appellate · 1,672 district · 2,206 state decisions — followed in 50 states

1.8k0194719501960197019801990200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Third Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Palmer v. Hoffman · Haley v. Van Lierop · Tague v. Delaware, L. & W. R. · Hickman v. Taylor

Cited together with Upjohn Company v. United States · United States v. Nobles · National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. · Fisher v. United States · United States v. Reynolds

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 9,505 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Mutual knowledge of all the relevant facts gathered by both parties is essential to proper litigation.”
    564 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. Sanders · Upjohn Company v. United States
  2. “... properly to balance [the] competing interests is a delicate and difficult task.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. 99 N.J. Super. 283 - Dougherty v. Gellenthin · Carpenter-Trant Drilling Co. v. Magnolia Petroleum Corp.
  3. “in the course of preparation for possible litigation.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep't of Justice · Athridge v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

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.