Burnham Broadcasting Co. v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently May 2016
17 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. § 1951 (Hobbs Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act)
Relies on United States v. Turkette · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Claiborne Hardware Company · United States v. S.A. Empresa de Viacao Aerea Rio Grandense · Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. United States · Nogueras v. Puerto Rico International Airlines, Inc.
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An injunction shall issue in cases where irreparable injury, loss, or damage may otherwise result to the applicant, or in other cases specifically provided by law.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) that the injury, loss or damage he will suffer if the injunction is not issued may be irreparable; (2) that he is entitled to the relief sought; and (3) that he is likely to prevail on the merits of the case.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"La.C.C.P. art. 3601, relative to the grounds for issuance of an injunction, provides, in pertinent part, as follows: `An injunction shall issue in cases where irreparable injury, loss, or damage may otherwise result to the applicant, or in other cases specifically provided by law.... `During the pendency of an action for an injunction the court may issue a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction, or both, except in cases where prohibited....' "In order to prevail at a hearing for preliminary injunction, the moving party must show two (sic) things: (1) that the injury, loss or damage he will suffer if the injunction is not issued may be irreparable; (2) that he is entitled to the relief sought; and (3) that he will be likely to prevail on the merits of the case. General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Daniels, 377 So.2d 346 (La. 1979); Franz v. Cormier, 579 So.2d 1201 (La.App. 5th Cir.1991). Only a prima facie showing is required; therefore, the petitioner is required to offer less proof than is necessary in an ordinary proceeding for permanent injunction. Id. Since a preliminary injunction is an interlocutory procedural device designed to preserve the status as it exists between the parties pending trial on the merits, a trial judge has great discretion to grant or deny the relief requested. Id."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.