United States v. Binzel’s Empirical Analysis
907 F.2d 746 · 1990
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently April 2016
5 federal appellate · 3 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
Relies on United States 77-1359 v. Kimbell Foods Inc · United States v. California · United States Steel Corporation v. United States Environmental Protection Agency · Dothard v. Rawlinson · Babrocky v. Jewel Food Co.
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“there must be a minimal factual basis from which knowledge of, and a familiarity with, another's handwriting might reasonably have been acquired, in the absence of which the opinion evidence may be properly excluded.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“that he acquired his `familiarity' with [the guarantor's] signature”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“were observed under circumstances indicating their genuineness.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.