United States v. Daane’s Empirical Analysis
475 F.3d 1114 · 2007
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently April 2021
9 federal appellate · 1 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. § 1951 (Hobbs Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 924
Relies on United States v. Enmons · Scheidler v. National Organization for Women, Inc. · Scheidler v. National Organization for Women, Inc. · United States v. Shortt Accountancy Corp. · United States v. Sturm
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Supreme Court observed that “[t]he legislative framework of the Hobbs Act ... makes it clear that the Act does not apply to the use of force to achieve legitimate labor ends.” However, “when the objectives of the picketing changed from legitimate labor ends to personal payoffs, then the actions became extortionate.””
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.