Keli v. Rice’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1429 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 29 U.S.C. § 2920 · 2 U.S.C. § 631 · 5 U.S.C. § 504 (Equal Access to Justice Act) · 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1151 (§ 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1153 (§ 203 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Enrico St Cyr · Powell v. McCormack · Honig v. Doe · North Carolina v. Rice · Davis v. Michigan Department of the Treasury
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The rule is clear, a diversity visa lottery winner must submit his application and hope to have it adjudicated favorably before the end of the fiscal year for which his diversity visa was issued. No exceptions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Both the Third and Seventh Circuits have hinted that the entry of injunctive relief prior to the end of the applicable fiscal year may preserve a case's justiciability.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Had Coraggioso sought relief prior to the expiration of the 1998 fiscal year, our analysis may have been different.”
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.