Baird v. Sabre Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (Hobbs Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2342 · 28 U.S.C. § 2344 · 47 U.S.C. § 227
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Sure-Tan, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board · United States v. Enmons
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It shall be unlawful for any person within the United States, or any person outside the United States if the recipient is within the United States— (A) to make any call (other than a call made for emergency purposes or made with the prior express consent of the called party) using any automatic telephone dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice— (i) to any emergency telephone line (including any “911” line and any emergency line of a hospital, medical physician or service office, health care facility, poison control center, or fire protection or law enforcement agency); (ii) to the telephone line of any guest room or patient room of a hospital, health care facility, elderly home, or similar establishment; or (in) to any telephone number assigned to a paging service, cellular telephone service, specialized mobile radio service, or other radio common carrier service, or any service for which the called party is charged for the call;”
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.