Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 94 F.3d 1 - Air Safety, Inc. v. Roman Catholic Archbishop of Boston

Air Safety, Inc. v. Roman Catholic Archbishop of Boston’s Empirical Analysis

94 F.3d 1 · 1996

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
2
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 24 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably United States v. Jamieson (2005), Colón-Fontánez v. Municipality of San Juan (2011)

15 federal appellate · 24 district · 2 state decisions

3201996200020102020decided

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 Wagenmann v. Adams · John Hetherington & Sons, Ltd. v. William Firth Co. · United States v. Bakker · United States v. Nivica · United States v. Sawyer

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

  1. “[T]o satisfy the “made available” requirement, a party seeking to use a summary under Rule 1006 must identify its exhibit as such, provide a list or description of the documents supporting the exhibit, and state when and where they may be reviewed.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “is limited to examining whether evidence in the record supports the verdict. If the jury award has a rational basis in evidence, we must affirm it.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “I don’t think that it is enough to say that the documents have been available or could have been available or were available when they were not identified as the source for these summaries. What is important in the discovery context is one thing, but once the discovery comes down to trial and somebody prepares a summary, it seems to me that the person providing the summary must say now these documents, this summary, is a summary of the following documents, and here they are.”
    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.