Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 544 U.S. 696 - Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States

Arthur Andersen LLP v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

509
cited by 509 later decisions
12
cited 12 times by the Supreme Court
9
states following
March 2025
most recently cited

261 federal appellate · 41 district · 34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 509 later decisions (12 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2025 · most notably United States v. Vampire Nation (2006), United States v. Quattrone (2006)

261 federal appellate · 41 district · 34 state decisions

2600200520102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedUnited States v. Arthur Andersen, LLP (from Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on Bailey v. United States · Upjohn Company v. United States · Allen v. United States · Trammel v. United States · Liparota v. United States

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

  1. “have in contemplation any particular official proceeding.”
    29 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “knowingly use[d] intimidation, threatened], corruptly persuaded] another person, or attempted] to do so, or engaged] in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to— (3) hinder, delay, or prevent the communication to a law enforcement officer or judge of the United States of information relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “It is ... one thing to say that a proceeding need not be pending or instituted at the time of the offense, and quite another to say a proceeding need not even be foreseen.”
    3 later decisions 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.