Giancana v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
335 F.2d 366 · 1964
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently April 2022 · most notably City of Milwaukee v. Saxbe (1976), Manual De J. Gomez v. Jerry v. Wilson, Chief of Police (1973)
21 federal appellate · 4 district · 2 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 Bell v. Hood · McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp. · Hague v. Committee for Industrial Organization · Lockerty v. Phillips · Van Buskirk v. Wilkinson
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * it limited the jurisdiction by including the element of the sum or value of the matter in controversy, * * *”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is incongruous to hold that a formal allegation of the amount in controversy is necessary when personal liberties of the magnitude alleged in the complaint and found by the district court are involved. To require a dollar value to be specifically averred in these circumstances is to exalt form over substance. In my opinion the fact that there was no formal allegation of the requisite jurisdictional amount did not prevent the district court from assuming jurisdiction. The complaint alleged that defendant and his agents deprived plaintiff of the use of his home and that they violated his right of privacy and personal liberty. From these allegations the district court could infer, contrary to what the majority indicates, that the amount in controversy exceeded $10,000.00. Id. at 371 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Boyd v. Clark“"The recommendations of the Judicial Conference regarding the amount in controversy, which this committee approves, is based on the premise that the amount should be fixed at a sum of money that will make jurisdiction available in all substantial controversies where other elements of Federal jurisdiction are present. The jurisdictional amount should not be so high as to convert the Federal courts into courts of big business nor so low as to fritter away their time in the trial of petty controversies." Id. at 368-369 n. 7, quoting from S.Rep. No. 1830, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958), 1958 U. S.Code Cong. & Ad. News, pp. 3099, 3101.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Boyd v. Clark
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.