Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 40 F.3d 544 - United States v. Liebman

United States v. Liebman’s Empirical Analysis

40 F.3d 544 · 1994

Citation profile

58
cited by 58 later decisions
September 2016
most recently cited

38 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably United States v. Diaz (1999), United States v. Payne (1995)

38 federal appellate · 1 district ·

400199420002010decided

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 42 U.S.C. § 9603 (§ 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980)

Relies on American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance v. United States · Mayers v. United States · FMC Corp. v. Holliday · Etlin v. Etlin · United States v. Parker

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. “an organizer, leader, manager or supervisor”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'exercise[d] some degree of control over others involved in the commission of the offense.'”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[i]n assessing whether an organization is 'otherwise extensive,' all persons involved during the course of the entire offense are to be considered. Thus a fraud that involved only three participants but used the unknowing services of many outsiders could be considered extensive.”
    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.