Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 6 F.3d 27 - United States v. Connell

United States v. Connell’s Empirical Analysis

6 F.3d 27 · 1993

Citation profile

59
cited by 59 later decisions
July 2019
most recently cited

41 federal appellate · 4 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably Douglass v. United Services Automobile Ass'n (1996), Data General Corporation v. Grumman Systems Support Corporation (1994)

41 federal appellate · 4 district ·

400199320002010decided

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. § 924 · 31 U.S.C. § 5313

Relies on Doerr v. Doerr · Yagow v. United States · Martin v. Delaware · Tamotsu Tanaka v. Creditors' Committee 1 · Norton Ex Rel. Chiles v. Mathews

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

  1. “take serial bites at the appellate apple,”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'must implement both the letter and the spirit of the mandate, taking into account the appellate court's opinion and the circumstances it embraces.'”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “an appellate court may forego the resolution of a jurisdictional question if, as is true here, the appeal is uncomplicated and easily resolved in favor of the party to whose benefit the jurisdictional question would redound.”
    2 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.