Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 380 F.3d 558 - United States v. Hoyts Cinemas Corp.

United States v. Hoyts Cinemas Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

380 F.3d 558 · 2004

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
2
states following
June 2022
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 7 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently June 2022 · most notably Pickett v. Sheridan Health Care Center (2011), United States v. AMC Entertainment, Inc. (2008)

12 federal appellate · 7 district · 2 state decisions

120200420102020decided

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 Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Auer v. Robbins · Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital · Thomas Jefferson University v. Shalala · Voinovich v. Quilter

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

  1. “capable of being determined by an assuredly accurate source.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “even though the Department's gloss is offered only in a brief rather than in some more formal manner”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “the statute as a whole remains highly relevant. It provides the purpose and general objectives that cast light on the meaning of the regulation at issue.'' United States v. Hoyts Cinemas Corp., 380 F.3d 558, 566 (1st Cir.2004). . The porches are not mezzanines. By definition,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.