Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 791 F.2d 179 - In re Sealed Case

In re Sealed Case’s Empirical Analysis

791 F.2d 179 · 1986

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
May 2016
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2016

5 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

701986199020002010decided

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 18 U.S.C. § 3731 · 18 U.S.C. § 6002 · 18 U.S.C. § 6003

Relies on Kastigar v. United States · Fisher v. United States · Federal Communications Commission v. Home Box Office, Inc. · United States v. Doe · Peter J. Migliorini v. New York

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

  1. “a heavy burden of proving that all evidence it seeks to introduce is untainted by the immunized act of production.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Immunity from the use of compelled testimony, as well as evidence derived directly and indirectly therefrom, ... prohibits the prosecutorial authorities from using the compelled testimony in any respect, and it therefore insures that the testimony cannot lead to the infliction of criminal penalties on the witness.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Thus, if in fact appellee's privilege in the act of production cannot be protected without excluding the contents of the tapes (a point on which we express no opinion) the District Court has the authority to prevent the government from referring to or introducing those contents.”
    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.