Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 972 F.2d 1174 - Long v. United States

Long v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

972 F.2d 1174 · 1992

Citation profile

63
cited by 63 later decisions
1
states following
June 2016
most recently cited

23 federal appellate · 12 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently June 2016 · most notably Scott v. Hern (2000), Hill III v. Smithkline Beecham Corporation Do M W (2004)

23 federal appellate · 12 district · 1 state decisions

370199220002010decided

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 26 U.S.C. § 6103 · 26 U.S.C. § 6303 · 26 U.S.C. § 6861 · 26 U.S.C. § 7431 · 26 U.S.C. § 7701 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1341 · 5 U.S.C. § 551 (Administrative Procedure Act of 1946)

Relies on In re Disbarment of Adelman · Bacchus Industries, Inc. v. Arvin Industries, Inc. · Drake v. City of Fort Collins · Elias v. Wh Connett · Griess v. Colorado

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

  1. “only upon written request by the head of such agency, body, or commission, and only to the representatives of such agency, body, or commission designated in such written request as the individuals who are to inspect or to receive the returns or return information on behalf of such agency, body, or commission.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “failure to state a reason can be harmless error where the reason is apparent,”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “A party may amend the party’s pleading once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served or, if the pleading is one to which no responsive pleading is permitted and the action has not been placed upon the trial calendar, the party may so amend it at any time within 20 days after it is served. Otherwise a party may amend the party’s pleading only by leave of court or by written consent of the adverse party; and leave shall be freely given when justice so requires.”
    2 later decisions 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.