Nichols v. Mahoney’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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

1. ““actual knowledge” must be understood to mean something more than “constructive knowledge.” This is apparent, first, from the language of § 1324(a)(3); the phrase “knowingly hire for employment at least 10 individuals with actual knowledge that [they are unauthorized]” suggests that “actual knowledge” is something more than general “knowing.” ... Additionally, the implementing regulation for 8 U.S.C. § 1324a — a closely related provision that focuses exclusively on the employment of aliens — defines “knowing” as “having actual or constructive knowledge.” 8 C.F.R. § 274a.l. This disjunctive makes no sense if constructive knowledge means the same thing as actual knowledge.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Broussard-Wadkins v. Maples

2. “The court recognizes that this action is one of many `civil RICO actions that have been filed in various courts across the nation, capitalizing on the popular outcry against undocumented aliens who are working openly in the United States.’ As such, it is probably not unreasonable to characterize Plaintiff’s action as `boilerplate’ or constructed of `recycled’ allegations.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 753 F. Supp. 2d 1113 - Hall v. Thomas