Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 917 F.3d 229 - Roe v. Howard

Roe v. Howard’s Empirical Analysis

917 F.3d 229 · 2019

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
July 2024
most recently cited

1 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1581 · 18 U.S.C. § 1585 · 18 U.S.C. § 1589 (§ 112 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000) · 18 U.S.C. § 1591 (§ 112 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000) · 18 U.S.C. § 1594 (§ 112 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000) · 18 U.S.C. § 1595 · 18 U.S.C. § 1596 · 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act)

Relies on Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Arabian American Oil Co. · Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd. · Pfizer Inc. v. Government of India · United States v. Queen

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

  1. “the trial evidence in the light most favorable to the prevailing party.”
    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.