In re Chevron Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
633 F.3d 153 · 2011
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1782
Relies on Fisher v. United States · United States v. Zolin · Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. · Grand Jury Proceedings Fmc Corporation · Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. Republic of the Philippines
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“evidence of a crime or fraud, no matter how compelling, does not by itself satisfy both elements of the crime-fraud exception to the attorney-client privilege because to establish the second element of the exception the party seeking to circumvent the privilege by invoking the exception bears the burden of making a prima facie showing that there were communications between the client and attorney in furtherance of that fraud.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“must make a prima facie showing that (1) the client was committing or intending to commit a fraud or crime, and (2) the attorney-client communications were in furtherance of that alleged crime or fraud. A prima facie showing requires presentation of evidence which, if believed by the fact-finder, would be sufficient to support a finding that the elements of the crime-fraud exception were met.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he district court of the district in which a person resides or is found may order him to give his testimony or statement or to produce a document or other thing for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal,”
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.