Buckley v. Mukasey’s Empirical Analysis
538 F.3d 306 · 2008
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently April 2021 · most notably Grosdidier v. Broadcasting Board of Governors (2013), United States ex rel. Drakeford v. Tuomey (2015)
7 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions
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. § 1291 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 717 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 704 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on Kotteakos v. United States · Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. White · Gasoline Products Co. v. Champlin Refining Co. · Gomez-Perez v. Potter · Goldsmith v. Bagby Elevator Co.
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“While Vodusek may be correct in concluding that she and her expert did not act in bad faith in destroying portions of the boat, she does not dispute that those portions were permanently destroyed as part of Halsey’s deliberate investigative efforts. While Halsey may have decided that the destroyed portions of the boat were not relevant to his theory of the case, that conclusion ignored the possibility that others might have entertained different theories to which the destroyed portions might have been relevant. In this case, both the defendants and the district court concluded that the destroyed portions were significant to the effort to explain where and why the boat explosion occurred.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he district court appears to have committed an error of law by equating the intentional conduct necessary for such an instruction with bad faith ....”
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.