Dale v. Bartels’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently January 2013
4 federal appellate ·
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. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 3500 · 21 U.S.C. § 812 (§ 202 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Douglas Oil Company of California v. Petrol Stops Northwest · Gregoire v. Biddle · Zarcone v. Perry · Margaret S. Rodriguez v. Donald E. Ritchey · Baker v. United States Steel Corp.
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““23. By making false and malicious statements to a grand jury, and acting in bad faith, certain unknown defendants caused an indictment to issue against defendants [sic, should read “plaintiffs”] on or about February 16, 1973 charging them with serious and infamous crimes which defendants knew or should have known there was no cause to believe plaintiffs have committed, thus depriving plaintiffs of their right to ‘due process of law’ guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Dale v. Bartels
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.