Driver v. Helms’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 10 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently May 1996
4 federal appellate · 10 district ·
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. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1361 · 28 U.S.C. § 1391 · 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 42 U.S.C. § 242 · 5 U.S.C. § 702
Relies on International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Hanson v. Denckla
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.
“It has been suggested by one of the defendants that this requirement is not met in the present case because some persons whose mail was monitored might regard the East Coast Mail Intercept Project as entirely reasonable and in the national interest. This assertion, if true, is irrelevant to the question of whether this action may be maintained as a class action.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Glover v. Johnson““Additional persons may be joined as parties to any such action in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and with such other venue requirements as would be applicable if the United States or one of its officers, employees, or agencies were not a party.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Driver v. Helms““A civil action in which each defendant is an officer of the United States in his official capacity, a person acting under him, or an agency of the United States, may be brought in any judicial district where a plaintiff in the action resides.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Driver v. Helms
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.