Mayesh v. Schultz’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2020
1 federal appellate · 2 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 921 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 922 (Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 923
Relies on United States v. Haden · 309 F. Supp. 1018 - Weidner v. Kennedy · 317 F. Supp. 1077 - McLemore v. United States Treasury Department · United States v. Decker
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The uncontroverted evidence shows clearly that plaintiff was aware of the above holding period requirements. Mr. Mayesh had been previously advised on the requirements under Illinois law, and he clearly acknowledged that he was aware of them”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““In a proceeding conducted under this subsection, the court may consider any evidence submitted by the parties to the proceeding.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“material facts developed at the administrative hearing, which the court also concludes justify nonrenewal”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.