Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 120 F.3d 34 - Mann v. Dn Haigh

Mann v. Dn Haigh’s Empirical Analysis

120 F.3d 34 · 1997

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
February 2016
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 6 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently February 2016 · most notably Williams v. BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. (2004), McLean v. United States (2009)

10 federal appellate · 6 district ·

160199720002010decided

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 United States v. Testan · Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp. · Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation · United States v. King · First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los Angeles

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

  1. “review under the Back Pay Act, Pub.L. No. 89-380, 80 Stat. 94 (1966) (codified as amended at 5 U.S.C.A. § 5596 ), of an adverse personnel action that was not subject to review under the CSRA. 484 U.S. at 455 , 108 S.Ct. at 677-78 . 17 Applying Fausto, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held in an action involving the termination of a NAFI employee that”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “in view of the comprehensiveness of the CSRA . . . the CSRA prevents [government ] employees from obtaining judicial review of an adverse employment decision under the APA.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “A person suffering legal wrong because of agency action, or adversely affected or aggrieved by agency action . . . is entitled to judicial review thereof.”
    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.