Findley v. Blinken’s Empirical Analysis
71 F.3d 1319 · 1995
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1962 · 28 U.S.C. § 1963 · 28 U.S.C. § 636
Relies on Peretz v. United States · Insurance Co. of Pennsylvania v. Ben Cooper, Inc. · Clarke v. West Virginia Board of Regents · Powers v. Chicago Transit Authority · United States v. Wey
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“). 3 In those cases, Mr. Walker, faced with collection proceedings pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1963 in the Central District of Illinois, challenged collaterally, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), the underlying contempt judgments entered against him in the United States District Courts for the Eastern and Southern Districts of New York (the”
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.