United States v. Rowe’s Empirical Analysis
96 F.3d 1294 · 1996
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably State Ex Rel. Toledo Blade Co. v. Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority (2009), Better Government Bureau, Inc. v. McGraw (1997)
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 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
Relies on Upjohn Company v. United States · 89 F. Supp. 357 - United States v. United Shoe MacHinery Corporation · Williamson County v. Bondholder Committee · United States v. Olano · Clarke v. American Commerce National Bank
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“clear that fact finding which pertains to legal advice counts as professional legal services.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the first step in the resolution of any legal problem is ascertaining the factual background and sifting through the facts with an eye to the legally relevant.”). Accord Pittsburgh Coming Corp. v. Caldwell, 861 S.W.2d 423, 425 (Tex.App. — Houston [14th Dist.] 1993, no writ) (”
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.