Hirt v. Richardson’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 4332 (§ 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969) · 5 U.S.C. § 706
Relies on Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Baker v. Carr · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Marsh v. Oregon Natural Resources Council · Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Courts have also required that environmental effects of multiple projects be analyzed together when those projects will have a cumulative effect on a given region. Finally, multiple stages of a development must be analyzed together when “the dependency is such that it would be irrational, or at least unwise, to undertake the first phase if subsequent phases were not also undertaken.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“(i) Automatically trigger other actions which may require environmental impact statements [or] (ii) Cannot or will not proceed unless other actions are taken previously or simultaneously [or] (iii) Are interdependent parts of a larger action and depend on the larger action for their justification.”
1 later decision 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.