Bulow Auersperg v. Bulow’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 31 district · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 225 later decisions — most recently May 2018 · most notably United States v. Construction Products Research, Inc. (1996), Sprague v. Thorn Americas, Inc. (1997)
11 federal appellate · 31 district · 15 state decisions
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 New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · United States v. Nixon · Branzburg v. Hayes · Fisher v. United States · Lovell v. City of Griffin
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 225 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Except as otherwise required by the Constitution of the United States or provided by Act of Congress or in rules prescribed by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority, the privilege of a witness, person, government, State, or political subdivision thereof shall be governed by the principles of the common law as they may be interpreted by the courts of the United States in the light of reason and experience. However, in civil actions and proceedings, with respect to an element of a claim or defense as to which State law supplies the rule of decision, the privilege of a witness, person, government, State, or political subdivision thereof shall be determined in accordance with State law.”
18 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the intent to use material--sought, gathered or received--to disseminate information to the public and [whether] such intent existed at the inception of the newsgathering process.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[t]he standard for testing the adequacy of the privilege log is whether, as to each document, it sets forth specific facts that, if credited, would suffice to establish each element of the privilege or immunity that is claimed. The focus is on the specific descriptive portion of the log, and not on the conclusory invocations of the privilege or work-product rule, since the burden of the party withholding documents cannot be “discharged by mere conclusory or ipse dixit assertions.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.