In Re Mudd’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently May 2006
1 district · 2 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
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 1104 · 11 U.S.C. § 344 · 11 U.S.C. § 727 · 28 U.S.C. § 157
Relies on United States v. Wade · Schmerber v. State of California · Gilbert v. California · Kastigar v. United States · Hoffman v. United States
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““To allow the Debtor to plead a blanket Fifth Amendment privilege [after volunteering information] and refuse to answer any further questions on the subjects covered in his earlier testimony would allow the Debtor to prematurely close the door which he freely opened. The law, however, does not permit a witness to open the door just wide enough to offer the Court an impaired view of the facts. Once the witness voluntarily opens the door, the Court may open it completely, and scrutinize every exposed matter.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“unless revealing those details would further incriminate him or subject him to new areas of incrimination.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Staton v. Brame
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.