Green v. Bock Laundry MacHine Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
504 federal appellate · 86 district · 124 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,228 later decisions (48 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2025 · most notably Chapman v. United States (1991), Janet Reno, Attorney General v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee et al. (1999)
504 federal appellate · 86 district · 124 state decisions — followed in 24 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Third Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Relies on Midlantic National Bank v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection · B.D. International Discount Corp. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. · Logarusic v. United States · D. Ginsberg & Sons, Inc. v. Popkin
Cited together with Public Citizen v. United States Department of Justice · United States v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc. · Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Griffin v. Oceanic Contractors, Inc. · Rector Etc of Holy Trinity Church 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 1,228 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“in the Rule. For that purpose, however, it would suffice to observe that counsel have not provided, nor have we discovered, a shred of evidence that anyone has ever proposed or assumed such a bizarre disposition.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“an absurd, and perhaps unconstitutional result”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that the witness has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted if elicited from the witness or established by public record during cross-examination but only if the crime (1) was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year under the law under which the witness was convicted, and the court determines that the probative value of admitting this evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect to the defendant, or (2) involved dishonesty or false statement, regardless of the punishment.”
8 later decisions 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.