United States v. Powers’s Empirical Analysis
629 F.2d 619 · 1980
Citation profile
77 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 112 later decisions — most recently October 2015 · most notably United States v. Flynt (1985), Donovan v. Mazzola (1983)
77 federal appellate · 3 district · 5 state decisions
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. § 401 · 18 U.S.C. § 4101 · 28 U.S.C. § 1826
Relies on United States v. United Mine Workers of America · Gompers v. Bucks Stove & Range Co. · Shillitani v. United States · Bloom v. Illinois · Sacher 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 112 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[d]isobedience or resistance to its lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“raise[s] the possibilities that the notice of the contempt charge was inadequate and that the contemnor was unable to properly prepare a defense. To address these possibilities we determine from the 'totality of the circumstances' what form of contempt proceeding was proper and what form was actually used.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"`The [c]ourt notifies the defendant that the court would incarcerate the defendant for the balance of the trial and set a hearing date regarding the contempt charges and possible sentence as a result thereof.'" Id. at 621 .”
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.