Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 542 F.3d 950 - In re Basciano

In re Basciano’s Empirical Analysis

542 F.3d 950 · 2008

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
4
states following
August 2024
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably United States v. Stewart (2009), United States v. Cordova (2015)

7 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

260200820102020decided

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. § 1959 · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 455

Relies on Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · Nogueras v. Puerto Rico International Airlines, Inc. · Washington v. Harper · United States v. Yousef · United States v. Studley

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. “opinions formed by the judge on the basis of facts introduced or events occurring in the course of the current proceedings, or of prior proceedings, do not constitute a basis for a bias or partiality motion unless they display a deep-seated favoritism or antagonism that would make fair judgment impossible.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'[I]t is well-settled that the exceptional remedy of mandamus will only be invoked where the petitioner has demonstrated that its right to such relief is "clear and indisputable.' "”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “demonstrate that the district court abused its discretion. Absent such a showing, mandamus will not lie.'”
    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.