Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 475 A2D 211 - In Re Procaccianti

In Re Procaccianti’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
3
states following
August 2001
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently August 2001

4 state decisions

20198419902000decided

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

Relies on United States v. Frias-Ramirez · 474 F. Supp. 761 - United States v. Burnett · United States v. Morales

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

  1. ““ ‘The sanction of a forfeiture is required not only to vindicate the public interest, but to assure that sureties, whether professional or family and friends, will be vigilant at all times to assure the appearance of defendants if and when required. The failure of a defendant to so appear is an interference with the due, prompt and efficient administration of justice; this is an injury to the public, entirely apart from, any expense to which the government is put to apprehend the defendant.’ ” (Emphasis added.) Procaccianti, 475 A.2d at 213 ( quoting United States v. Burnett, 474 F.Supp. 761, 763 (S.D.N.Y.1979)).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.