United States v. Lauersen’s Empirical Analysis
348 F.3d 329 · 2003
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 3 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably United States v. Allen (2007), United States v. Vilar (2013)
24 federal appellate · 3 district · 10 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. § 1035 (§ 244 of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 1347 (§ 242 of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) · 18 U.S.C. § 1512 · 18 U.S.C. § 1841 · 18 U.S.C. § 20 · 18 U.S.C. § 3553 · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 3742
Relies on Liljeberg v. Health Services Acquisition Corp. · United States v. Ravich · United States v. Campbell · United States v. Bayless · United States v. Sofsky
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” This language is, for all intents and purposes, a statutory codification of former Canon 3E(1), in effect in 2007, which stated,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Chen v. Hoeflinger“There is no reason to prohibit a judge from reconsidering a recusal decision, at least in the absence of transfer of the case to another judge.”
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.