Chevron Corp. v. Donziger’s Empirical Analysis
833 F.3d 74 · 2016
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently June 2022
8 federal appellate · 1 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
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 78D (§ 4 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 18 U.S.C. § 1348 (§ 807 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1503 · 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (Hobbs Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 1952 · 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (§ 1352 of the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act)
Relies on Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Warth v. Seldin · Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. · Link v. Wabash Railroad · Sedima Sprl v. Imrex Company Inc
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“received, or hereafter may receive, directly or indirectly, or to which Donziger [as of the date of the RICO Judgment] now has, or hereafter obtains, any right, title or interest, directly or indirectly, that is traceable to the [Ecuador] Judgment or the enforcement of the [Ecuador] Judgment anywhere in the world.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he record in the present case reveals a parade of corrupt actions by the LAPs' [i.e., the Ecuadorian plaintiffs'] legal team, including coercion, fraud, and bribery, culminating in the promise to [Ecuadorian] Judge Zambrano of $ 500,000 from a judgment in favor of the [Ecuadorian plaintiffs, the] LAPs.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“a federal court is authorized to grant equitable relief to a private plaintiff who has proven injury to its business or property by reason of a defendant's violation of [ 18 U.S.C.] § 1962”
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.