Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 512 F.2d 374 - Short v. Murphy

Short v. Murphy’s Empirical Analysis

512 F.2d 374 · 1975

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
July 2011
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently July 2011 · most notably In Re First Federal Savings And Loan Association Of Durham (1988), Kennecott Copper Corp. v. Costle (1978)

12 federal appellate · 2 district ·

23019751980199020002010decided

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 Roe v. Wade · Holland v. United States · Aetna Life Ins Co of Hartford Conn v. Haworth · United States v. W. T. Grant Co. · Marco Defunis et al. v. Charles Odegaard, President of the University of Washington.

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

  1. “(a) taxpayer who may be the subject of a criminal recommendation will be afforded a District Intelligence conference when he requests one or where the Chief, Intelligence Division, makes a determination that such a conference will be in the best interests of the Government.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “mandatory or ministerial obligation. If the alleged duty is discretionary or directory, the duty is not 'owed.' " Short v. Murphy, 512 F.2d 374 , 377 (6th Cir.1975). A duty is not "owed”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “(t)his Rule was never meant to be an instrument for pre-trial discovery such as provided by Fed.R.Crim.P. 16, or the Jencks Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3500. Those rights accrue after indictment.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.