Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 775 FSUPP 502 - Cacace v. Lucas

Cacace v. Lucas’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
2
states following
September 2018
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Clark v. Capital Credit & Collection Services, Inc. (2006), Michael G. Schroyer (1999)

6 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions

140199020002010decided

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 15 U.S.C. § 1601 (§ 102 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692 (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692C (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692E (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692K (Sherman Antitrust Act)

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Baker v. G. C. Services Corp. · Pipiles v. Credit Bureau of Lockport, Inc. · Crossley v. Lieberman

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

  1. “any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of which is the collection of any debts, or who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, debts owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another....”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Except as otherwise provided by this section, any debt collector who fails to comply with any provision of this sub-chapter with respect to any person is liable to such person in an amount equal to the sum of— (1) any actual damage sustained by such person as a result of such failure;”
    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.