United States v. Scott’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 5 district · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2005 · most notably Scott v. United States (1978), Zweibon v. Mitchell (1975)
26 federal appellate · 5 district · 16 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 28 U.S.C. § 2518
Relies on Wong Sun v. United States · Katz v. United States · Aguilar v. Texas · Brinegar v. United States · Jones v. 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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Every order . . . shall contain a provision that the authorization to intercept . . . shall be conducted in such a way as to minimize the interception of communications not otherwise subject to interception . . . . ””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““If this Court were to allow the Government agents to indiscriminately intercept every conversation made and to continue monitoring such calls when it becomes clear that they are not related to the ‘authorized objectives’ of the wiretap and in violation of the limiting provisions of the order such order would become meaningless verbiage and the protections to the right of privacy outlined in Berger and Katz would be illusory.” 331 F.Supp. page 248.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he record is devoid of any attempt, no matter how slight, to minimize the interception of unauthorized calls.”
3 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.