Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 621 F.3d 1366 - Holland v. United States

Holland v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

621 F.3d 1366 · 2010

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
December 2025
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

Appellate journey

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1295

Relies on Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. · United States v. Winstar Corp. · Winstar Corporation Fsb v. United States · Anderson v. United States · California Federal Bank, FSB v. United States

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

  1. “Under Illinois law, the absolute and unconditional release of one co-obligor releases all other co-obligors even if the other co-obligors 'were not a party to the release or specifically identified in the release.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The intent at issue is whether the parties intended the agreement to serve as an 'absolute and unconditional' release of the co-obligor executing the agreement.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “proper subject matter, competent parties, meeting of the minds of the parties, and consideration.”
    1 later decision 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.