Bowen v. Oistead’s Empirical Analysis
125 F.3d 800 · 1997
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 6 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably Jones v. New York State Division of Military & Naval Affairs (1999), Day v. Massachusetts Air National Guard (1999)
11 federal appellate · 6 district · 4 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1446 · 28 U.S.C. § 2671 · 28 U.S.C. § 2679 · 32 U.S.C. § 502 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Feres v. United States · Chappell v. Wallace · United States v. Shearer · United States v. Stanley · United States v. Johnson
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“whenever a legal action would require a civilian court to examine decisions regarding management, discipline, supervision, and control of members of the armed forces”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The National Guard “occupies a distinct role in the federal structure that does not fit neatly within the scope of either state or national concerns.” Knutson v. Wisconsin Air Nat’l Guard, 995 F.2d 765, 767 (7th Cir.1993). It is a hybrid organization that serves the state within which it is located as-well as the federal government in times of need. “[T]he Guard may serve the state in times of civil, strife within its borders while also being available for federal service during national emergencies.” Id.; see also New Jersey Air Nat’l Guard v. Federal Labor Relations Auth. 677 F.2d 276 , 279 (3d Cir.1982). (“Within each state the National Guard is a state agency, Under state authority and control. At the same time, the activity, makeup, and function of the Guard is provided for, to a large extent, by federal law.”).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he military apparatus of the United States cannot be divided into strictly state and federal components.... Feres applies to the state National Guards and their members due to the integral role they play as part of the nation’s defense force and the substantial degree to which the state National Guards are financed, regulated, and controlled by the federal government even when not called into active federal service.”
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.