Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 464 F.3d 321 - United States v. Rangolan

United States v. Rangolan’s Empirical Analysis

464 F.3d 321 · 2006

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
February 2019
most recently cited

4 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3691 · 18 U.S.C. § 401

Relies on Gompers v. Bucks Stove & Range Co. · Bloom v. Illinois · International Union, United Mine Workers v. Bagwell · Taylor v. Hayes · Nye v. United States

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

  1. “a necessary and integral part of the independence of the judiciary, and is absolutely essential to the performance of the duties imposed on them by law.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “in its presence if the judge saw or heard the contemptuous conduct and so certifies.”
    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.