Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 841 F.2d 166 - Shacket v. Philko Aviation, Inc.

Shacket v. Philko Aviation, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

841 F.2d 166 · 1988

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
1
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably West Norris v. Waymire (1997), Usa Diversified Products Inc Boyer v. Carlton Fields Ward Emmanuel Smith & Cutler Pa (1996)

7 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

1301988199020002010decided

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 26 U.S.C. § 6323

Relies on Duckworth v. Franzen · Philko Aviation, Inc. v. Shacket · Stowers v. Mahon · United States v. Ramsey · United States v. Josefik

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

  1. “Admittedly, the line between “constructive notice,” which is not within the scope of 49 U.S.C. § 1403 (c), and “implied actual notice,” which is, is a fine one. But “constructive notice” often means no notice, while “implied actual notice” requires (1) actual knowledge of (2) highly suspicious circumstances, coupled with (3) an unaccountable failure to react to them. This in turn is a shade short of the form of actual knowledge that consists of closing your eyes because you’re afraid of what you would see if you opened them.”
    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.