Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 63 FSUPP 961 - In Re Tate

In Re Tate’s Empirical Analysis

1946

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
3
states following
September 2000
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently September 2000

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions

501946195019601970198019902000decided

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 Johnson v. Zerbst · Burns v. United States · Escoe v. Zerbst · Richbourg Motor Co. v. United States · French v. Edwards

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

  1. ““When a prisoner has been retaken upon a warrant issued by the Board of Parole, he shall be given an opportunity to appear before the Board, a member thereof, or an examiner designated by the Board. At such hearing Tie may 6e represented t>y counsel. * * * “In the event a prisoner is confined in, or as a parolee is returned to a penal or correctional institution other than a penal or correctional institution o:: the District of Columbia, the Board of Parole created by the Act of May 13, 1930 (ch. 255, 46 Stat. 272 ; 18 U.S.C. § 723a), shall have and exercise the same power and authority as the Board of Parole of the District of Columbia had the prisoner been confined in or returned to a penal or correctional institution of the District of Columbia.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
    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.