Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 362 FSUPP 1321 - Ditlow v. Volpe

Ditlow v. Volpe’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
December 2011
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently December 2011

5 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions

13019731980199020002010decided

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 15 U.S.C. § 1381 (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 1905 · 26 U.S.C. § 6103 · 5 U.S.C. § 552 (Freedom of Information Act)

Relies on Soucie v. David · St. Regis Paper Co. v. United States · Getman v. National Labor Relations Board · Bristol-Myers Co. v. Federal Trade Commission · Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corp. v. Renegotiation Board

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

  1. “. There are no apparent problems with confidential sources, premature revelation of suspects and the like. And most certainly in the present case there is no problem about discovery of the information by the subject of the investigation, since the auto manufacturer is either the recipient or the source of all the correspondence here sought. “Disclosure of materials already in the hands of po tential parties to law enforcement proceedings can in no way be said to interfere with an agency’s legitimate law enforcement functions and, therefore, such material is not within the exception of § 552(b)(7).” (Footnotes omitted.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “no indication in [the National Highway and Traffic Safety Act] or [its] legislative history of [an] intent to create a special, broadened confidentiality for auto safety information than that available”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “harmonizes with exemption 4 in protecting trade secrets and privileged or confidential financial or commercial information.”
    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.