Hibbert v. Immigration & Naturalization Service’s Empirical Analysis
554 F.2d 17 · 1977
Citation profile
19 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2016 · most notably Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Rios-Pineda (1985), Gebremichael v. Immigration & Naturalization Service (1993)
19 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
Relies on Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Bagamasbad · Trias-Hernandez v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Lok v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Lennon v. Immigration & Naturalization Service · Acevedo v. Immigration & Naturalization Service
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The five-year period is not a statute of limitations; it is merely a threshold requirement for relief.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“there is no reason to remand the case to the Board for a pointless determination”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“permit any alien under deportation proceedings ... to depart voluntarily from the United States at his own expense in lieu of deportation if such alien shall establish to the satisfaction of the Attorney General that he is, and has been, a person of good moral character for at least five years immediately preceding his application for voluntary departure.”
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.