Hately v. Watts’s Empirical Analysis
917 F.3d 770 · 2019
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1030 (Computer Fraud and Abuse Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2701 (§ 201 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2702 (§ 201 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2703 (§ 201 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2704 (§ 201 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2705 (§ 201 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2707 (§ 201 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986)
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Erie Co v. Tompkins · Duncan v. Walker · Taylor v. Sturgell · George Duncan Superintendent Great Meadow Correctional Facility v. Sherman Walker
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“is to apply 'the law that would be applied by state courts in the State in which the federal diversity court sits' as long as the state rule is not 'incompatible with federal interests.'”
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.