In re Sealed Case’s Empirical Analysis
737 F.2d 94 · 1984
Citation profile
34 federal appellate · 93 district · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 188 later decisions — most recently August 2020 · most notably Tax Analysts v. Internal Revenue Service (1997), In re Sealed Case (1985)
34 federal appellate · 93 district · 15 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 28 U.S.C. § 294
Relies on United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · United States v. Nixon · United States v. Calandra · Upjohn Company v. United States · Pullman-Standard v. Swint
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 188 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the asserted holder of the privilege is or sought to become a client; (2) the person to whom the communication was made (a) is a member of the bar of a court or his subordinate and (b) in connection with this communication is acting as a lawyer; (3) the communication relates to a fact of which the attorney was informed (a) by his client (b) without the presence of strangers (c) for the purpose of securing primarily either (i) an opinion on law or (ii) legal services or (iii) assistance in some legal proceeding, and not (d) for the purpose of committing a crime or tort; and (4) the privilege has been (a) claimed and (b) not waived by the client.”
37 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[i]n practice, however, advice does not spring from lawyers’ heads as Athena did from the brow of Zeus.... In a given case, advice prompted by the client’s disclosures may be further and inseparably informed by other knowledge and encounters. We have therefore stated that the privilege cloaks a communication from attorney to client based, in part at least, upon a confidential communication to the lawyer from the client ... [and] the claimant must demonstrate with reasonable certainty that the lawyer’s communication rested in significant and inseparable part, on the client’s confidential disclosure.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We are mindful ... that C was a Company vice president, and had certain responsibilities outside the lawyer’s sphere. The Company can shelter C’s advice only upon a clear showing that C gave it in a professional legal capacity.”
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.