Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 381 F.3d 1205 - In re Sealed Case

In re Sealed Case’s Empirical Analysis

381 F.3d 1205 · 2004

Citation profile

58
cited by 58 later decisions
1
states following
January 2024
most recently cited

29 federal appellate · 14 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently January 2024 · most notably United States v. Monzel (2011), Doe v. Dairy (2006)

29 federal appellate · 14 district · 1 state decisions

300200420102020decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1367 · 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 5 U.S.C. § 552A (§ 3 of the Privacy Act of 1974)

Relies on Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Koon v. United States · United States v. Munsingwear, Inc. · Quackenbush California Insurance Commissioner v. Allstate Insurance Co · Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority v. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc.

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

  1. “[T]he HIPAA regulations do not impose state evidentiary privileges on suits to enforce federal law. Illinois is free to enforce its more stringent medical-records privilege ... in suits in state court to enforce state law and, by virtue of an express provision in Fed.R.Evid. 501, in suits in federal court (mainly diversity suits) as well in which state law supplies the rule of decision. But the Illinois privilege does not govern in federal-question suits, such as the suit in the Southern District of New York.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[a] district court by definition abuses its discretion when it makes an error of law,”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[I]n determining which interests to weigh in the Rule 26 balance, courts look to statutory confidentiality provisions, even if they do not create enforceable privileges.”
    2 later decisions 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.