United States v. Kim’s Empirical Analysis
595 F.2d 755 · 1979
Citation profile
60 federal appellate · 10 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 110 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2018 · most notably United States v. Young (1985), Securities and Exchange Commission v. First City Financial Corporation Ltd (1989)
60 federal appellate · 10 district · 7 state decisions
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
reviewedthe decision below (from District of Columbia District Court)
Relationships
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Griffin v. California · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Castor v. United States · Cruz v. Hauck
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 110 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form, of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made at or near the time by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge, if kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity, and if it was the regular practice of that business activity to make the memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, all as shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness, unless the information or method or circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“intended that the residual hearsay exceptions will be used very rarely, and only in exceptional circumstances.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the court determines that (A) the statement is offered as evidence of a material fact; (B) the statement is more probative on the point for which it is offered than any other evidence which the proponent can procure through reasonable efforts; and (C) the general purposes of these rules and the interests of justice will best be served by admission of the statement into evidence[.]”
4 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.