US West, Inc. v. Nelson’s Empirical Analysis
146 F.3d 718 · 1998
Citation profile
6 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently December 2021
6 federal appellate ·
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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1342 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Younger v. Harris · Burford v. Sun Oil Co. · Rosewell v. National Bank · Maryland v. United States Tandy Corporation v. United States North American Telephone Association v. United States Illinois v. United States · Public Utilities Commission of State of California v. United States
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“order affecting rates chargeable by a public utility.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“) But US West must be read based on the specific facts animating that decision. There, [b]y appellants’ own allegations, imputation is an accounting practice that the Commission uses to derive intrastate telecommunications ratés. As such, it is “an integral part of the rate structures” that may not be attacked in federal court under the Johnson Act. Because imputation is a Commission procedure that cannot be separated from its substantive expression in rate orders, the US West companies' challenge to imputation — however phrased — is a challenge to”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'Certainly all state rate-making action does have some influence upon or effect upon interstate commerce but these actions do not necessarily interfere with interstate commerce . . ..'”
2 later decisions 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.