Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 428 F.3d 271 - Horowitz v. Peace Corps

Horowitz v. Peace Corps’s Empirical Analysis

428 F.3d 271 · 2005

Citation profile

58
cited by 58 later decisions
1
states following
January 2023
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 29 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently January 2023 · most notably Sussman v. United States Marshals Service (2007), Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Food & Drug Administration (2006)

13 federal appellate · 29 district · 2 state decisions

340200520102020decided

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 5 U.S.C. § 552 (Freedom of Information Act) · 5 U.S.C. § 552A (§ 3 of the Privacy Act of 1974)

Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. · Department of the Air Force v. Rose · United States Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press · Hormel v. Helvering

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. “balance[s] the private interest involved (namely, the individual's right of privacy) against the public interest (namely ... to open agency action to the light of public scrutiny).”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[Plaintiff's] need to obtain the information for a pending civil suit is irrelevant, as the public interest to be weighed has nothing to do with [Plaintiff's] ... situation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “personnel and medical files and similar files the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”
    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.