Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 956 F.2d 1309 - United States v. Huntress

United States v. Huntress’s Empirical Analysis

956 F.2d 1309 · 1992

Citation profile

86
cited by 86 later decisions
9
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

54 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 86 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably United States v. Webster (1998), United States v. Edwards (2002)

54 federal appellate · 9 state decisions

4801992200020102020decided

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 Lord Electric Co. v. United States · Mansion House Center South Redevelopment Co. v. United States · Williams v. Florida · Bell v. United States · Boatmen's National Bank of St. Louis v. Carver

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

  1. “convinced that the juror's abilities to perform his duties [have] become impaired.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “if the court finds it necessary to excuse a juror for just cause after the jury has retired to consider its verdict, in the discretion of the court a valid jury verdict may be returned by the remaining eleven jurors.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “may use their common sense and evaluate the facts in light of their knowledge of the natural tendencies and inclinations of human beings.”
    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.