Dreyfus v. Von Finck’s Empirical Analysis
534 F.2d 24 · 1976
Citation profile
45 federal appellate · 8 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 92 later decisions — most recently July 2018 · most notably Yuen Jin v. Mukasey (2008), Wang v. Ashcroft J Ins Ins
45 federal appellate · 8 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 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1350 (Torture Victim Protection Act of 1991)
Relies on Bell v. Hood · Gully v. First Nat. Bank in Meridian · Romero v. International Terminal Operating Co. · Banco Nacional De Cuba v. Sabbatino · Goldlawr, Inc. v. Heiman
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 92 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An action arises under a treaty only when the treaty expressly or by implication provides for a private right of action. The treaty must be self-executing; i.e., it must prescribe rules by which private rights may be determined.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'Like a general treaty, the law of nations has been held not to be self-executing so as to vest a plaintiff with individual legal rights.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Rarely is the relationship between a private claim and a general treaty sufficiently direct so that it may be said to ‘arise under’ the treaty,” id. at 29. Dreyfus is not at all instructive in the case at bar, where the U.K. sues to enforce an extradition treaty with the United States of which it is a sovereign signatory and party. 4 . Ultimately Wacker’s procedural victory availed him nothing. The majority also held that”
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.