Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 821 F.3d 1 - United States v. Scurry

United States v. Scurry’s Empirical Analysis

821 F.3d 1 · 2016

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
September 2024
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2515 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2516 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2520 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986)

Relies on Illinois v. Gates · Duncan v. Walker · New York State Conference of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers Insurance · Scott v. United States · United States v. Giordano

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

  1. “each of the Hudson and Johnson [wiretap] orders is 'insufficient on its face,' because each fails to include information expressly required by Title III,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the individual high-level Justice Department official who, as required by section 2516(1), authorized the underlying wiretap application.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “left open the possibility that a 'technical defect' in a wiretap order might not rise to the level of facial insufficiency, but rather would render the order 'imperfect' "). As the government explains, "[t]he Title III application language ... regarding the identification of the 'appropriate official' reflects DOJ policy to secure additional internal approval of applications for interception of electronic communications,”
    1 later decision 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.