Charles Coles Diggs, Jr. v. Elliot L. Richardson’s Empirical Analysis
555 F.2d 848 · 1976
Citation profile
42 federal appellate · 9 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 71 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2022 · most notably Medellin v. Texas (2008), Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon (2006)
42 federal appellate · 9 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
Relies on Warth v. Seldin · Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization · Schlesinger v. Reservists Committee to Stop the War · United States v. Richardson · Chicago & Southern Air Lines, Inc. v. Waterman Steamship Corp.
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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“look to the intent of the signatory parties as manifested by the language of the instrument, and, if the instrument is uncertain, recourse must be had to the circumstances surrounding its execution.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A treaty is primarily a compact between independent nations. It depends for the enforcement of its provisions on the interest and the honor of the governments which are parties to it. If these fail, its infraction becomes the subject of international negotiations and reclamations, so far as the injured party chooses to seek redress, which may in the end be enforced by actual war. It is obvious that with all this the judicial courts have nothing to do and can give no redress.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“essentially the kind of standard that is rooted in diplomacy and its incidents, rather than in conventional adjudication.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.