Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 335 F.2d 372 - Giancana v. Johnson

Giancana v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

335 F.2d 372 · 1964

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
May 1994
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently May 1994

12 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

1001964197019801990decided

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 McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp. · United States v. United Mine Workers of America · United States Touhy v. Ragen · Sawyer · United States v. Shipp

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

  1. ““No officer or employee of the Department of Justice shall produce or disclose, in response to a subpoena, order, or other demand (hereinafter in this part referred to as a ‘demand’) of a court or other authority any information or material contained in the flies of the Department of Justice or any other information or material acquired as a part of the performance of his official duties or because of his official status, without the prior approval of the Attorney General. For the purposes of this part, the term ‘officer or employee of the Department of Justice’ includes all officers and employees of the United States appointed by, or subject to the supervision, jurisdiction, or control of, the Attorney General of the United States, including United States Attorneys, United States Marshals, and members of the staffs of those officials. “§ 16.2. Procedure in the event of a demand for production or disclosure. “(a)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, whenever a demand is made upon an officer or employee of the Department of Justice for the production or disclosure of information or material contained in the files of the Department of Justice or for the production or disclosure of any other information or material acquired as a part of the performance of his official duties or because of his official status, he shall immediately notify the Attorney General of such demand. If possible, the Attorney General shall be notified before the officer or employee conce”
    1 later decision 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.