Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 596 F.2d 468 - Irons v. Bell

Irons v. Bell’s Empirical Analysis

596 F.2d 468 · 1979

Citation profile

90
cited by 90 later decisions
2
states following
February 2018
most recently cited

54 federal appellate · 11 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably Lesar v. United States Department of Justice (1980), Church of Scientology of California v. United States Department of Army (1979)

54 federal appellate · 11 district · 2 state decisions

60019791980199020002010decided

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. § 2385 · 18 U.S.C. § 951 · 22 U.S.C. § 611 (Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938) · 50 U.S.C. § 3811 · 50 U.S.C. § 781 · 5 U.S.C. § 552 (Freedom of Information Act) · 5 U.S.C. § 552A (§ 3 of the Privacy Act of 1974)

Relies on United States v. Nixon · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. State of Alabama Patterson · National Labor Relations Board v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co. · Vaughn v. Rosen · Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Committee

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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(7) records or information compiled for law enforcement purposes, but only to the extent that the production of such law enforcement records or information ... (C) could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy ...”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The character of the materials excluded under Exemption 7 at least suggests that “law enforcement purpose” is as much a description of the type of agency the exemption is aimed at as it is a condition on the use of the exemption by agencies having administrative as well as civil enforcement duties.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “... we are hard pressed to conceive of a standard that would enable a district court to distinguish at an in camera proceeding between a colorably justifiable investigation that turned out to be a blind alley and an investigation that was bogus from the beginning.”
    3 later decisions 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.