In re Sealed Case’s Empirical Analysis
801 F.2d 1379 · 1986
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently March 2020
8 federal appellate · 4 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
Relies on United States v. Procter & Gamble Co. · Douglas Oil Company of California v. Petrol Stops Northwest · United States v. Sells Engineering, Inc. · United States v. Baggot · Securities and Exchange Commission v. Dresser Industries Inc Securities and Exchange Commission
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the degree of exposure of the grand jury process inherent in the revelation of subpoenaed documents is lesser than the degree of disclosure attributable to publication of witness transcripts.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“provides that disclosure of 'matters occurring before the grand jury' is prohibited unless specifically permitted by one of the exceptions set forth in Rule 6(e)(3).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. McKeever v. Barr“at the very least, the direction of the grand jury's investigation and the names of persons involved, and thus falls within Rule 6(e)(2).”
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.