Kirk v. Heppt’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 1964 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 802 (§ 102 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Foman v. Davis · Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection Corporation · Moss v. Morgan Stanley Inc. · Ss Silberblatt Inc Ss v. East Harlem Pilot Block Building Housing Development Fund Company Inc · Lerner v. Fleet Bank
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Because the mere assertion of a RICO claim ... has an almost inevitable stigmatizing effect on those named as defendants, ... courts should strive to flush out frivolous RICO allegations at an early stage of the litigation.’’) (citations and quotation marks omitted). 71 . Goldfine v. Sichenzia, 118 F.Supp.2d 392, 394 (S.D.N.Y.2000). Accord Kirk, at 150 (courts”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“must he wary of putative civil RICO claims that are nothing more than sheep masquerading in wolves’ clothing”); Schmidt v. Fleet Bank, 16 F.Supp.2d 340, 346 (S.D.N.Y.1998) (noting that because civil RICO”
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.