Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 842 F. Supp. 2d 338 - Cunningham v. Holder

842 F. Supp. 2d 338 - Cunningham v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
May 2018
most recently cited

3 district ·

Relationships

Applies 5 U.S.C. § 552 (Freedom of Information Act) · 5 U.S.C. § 552A (§ 3 of the Privacy Act of 1974)

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · McKart v. United States · SafeCard Services, Inc. v. Securities & Exchange Commission · Military Audit Project v. Casey

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

  1. “Because it was affirmatively enacted by Congress, Rule 6(e) is recognized as a 'statute' for Exemption 3 purposes.”
    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.