Luis v. Zang’s Empirical Analysis
833 F.3d 619 · 2016
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently May 2025
2 federal appellate · 2 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2511 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2512 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2520 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986)
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Conley v. Gibson · Dayco Corp. v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. · Bassett v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“as the aural or other acquisition of the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication through the use of any electronic, mechanical or other device. Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-6-303 (11) ; Cardinal Health , 582 F.Supp.2d at 979 . 8 In other words, for a communication to be”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“All of the circuit courts that have considered the issue ... have concluded ... that the acquisition of a communication must be contemporaneous with its transmission in order for an 'intercept' to occur.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“interceptions of communications and highlights that here, Lindsey discovered on Sparks's Facebook page a recording of a conversation that had already taken place. The federal Wiretap Act does not explicitly require that the acquisition of a communication occur contemporaneously with its transmission. 2 Wayne R. LaFave et al., Criminal Procedure , § 4.6(b) (4th ed. 2017). Nonetheless, federal courts have uniformly concluded that the Wiretap Act covers only”
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.