Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 989 F.2d 347 - United States v. Ford

United States v. Ford’s Empirical Analysis

989 F.2d 347 · 1993

Citation profile

58
cited by 58 later decisions
January 2016
most recently cited

35 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently January 2016 · most notably United States v. McKinney (1994), United States v. Karterman (1995)

35 federal appellate ·

430199320002010decided

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 Brewster v. Derwinski · Nicholas v. United States · Joseph v. United States · San Vicente Medical Partners, Ltd. v. Orr · United Air Lines, Inc. v. McMann

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

  1. “Because the sentencing judge is in a unique position to evaluate a defendant's acceptance of responsibility, the district court's determination is entitled to great deference on review.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “generate corporate foreign tax payments which are then claimed on a domestic personal income tax return as foreign tax credits is sufficiently 'more complex' than 'routine tax evasion”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “If a defendant willfully obstructed or impeded, or attempted to obstruct or impede, the administration of justice during the investigation, prosecution, or sentencing of the instant offense, increase the offense level by 2 levels.”
    2 later decisions 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.