Doe v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
429 F.3d 706 · 2005
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently May 2024 · most notably McCready v. eBay, Inc. (2006), Edwards v. Snyder (2007)
24 federal appellate · 3 district ·
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 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2511 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 28 U.S.C. § 1367 · 28 U.S.C. § 2403
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Hishon v. King & Spalding · Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A. · United States v. Lopez · Gomez v. Toledo
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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Plaintiff was a minor when the recording occurred but is an adult today. She has denied Smith the shelter of anonymity— yet it is Smith, and not the plaintiff, who faces disgrace if the complaint’s allegations can be substantiated. And if the complaint’s allegations are false, then anonymity provides a shield behind which defamatory charges may be launched without shame or liability. Everyone at the high school who saw the recording already knows who “Doe” is, and most people acquainted with Smith could find out whether or not they had seen the recording. (Their dating relationship was no secret.) Now perhaps anonymity still could be justified if the tape has been circulated more widely (as counsel asserted at oral argument), and disclosure would allow strangers to identify the person in the recording and thus add to her humiliation. That question should be explored in the district court — and, if the judge decides that anonymous litigation is inappropriate, the plaintiff should be allowed to dismiss the suit in lieu of revealing her name.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It shall not be unlawful under this chapter for a person ... to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication where such person is a party to the communication or where one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception unless such communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or of any State.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“need do no more than narrate a grievance simply and directly, so that the defendant knows what he has been accused of”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Edwards v. Snyder
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.