Grand Jury’s Empirical Analysis
619 F.2d 1022 · 1980
Citation profile
50 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably United States v. Westinghouse Electric Corp. (1980), United States v. Hubbard (1980)
50 federal appellate · 3 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
Relies on United States v. Nixon · Costello v. United States · Branzburg v. Hayes · Cobbledick v. United States · United States v. Dionisio
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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“in contrast with the Alexander-Cobble-dick-Ryan rule on finality, it has been recognized that when a party, other than the one to whom a subpoena has been addressed, moves to quash the subpoena, the denial of his motion disposes of his claim fully and finally. Perlman v. United States, 247 U.S. 7 , 38 S.Ct. 417 , 62 L.Ed. 950 (1918). See also Gravel v. United States, 408 U.S. 606 , 608 n. 1, 92 S.Ct. 2614 , 2618, 33 L.Ed.2d 583 (1972); United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. [683] at 691, 94 S.Ct. [3090] at 3099 [ 41 L.Ed.2d 1039 ]. In this court we have had several occasions to recognize the distinction between the Perlman and the Alexander-CobbledickRyan rule.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Third party standing to assert claims of grand jury abuse cannot be determined by categorizing the claimed interest as one of property or privilege, but only by examining the nature of the abuse, and asking whether, and in what manner, it impinges upon the legitimate interests of the party allegedly abused.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“it is unlikely that a third party, even an employee, would risk a contempt citation in order to provide [the employer] with immediate review.”
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.