Smith v. Cromer’s Empirical Analysis
159 F.3d 875 · 1998
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently November 2022 · most notably Schism v. United States (2002), Comsat Corporation v. National Science Foundation, and National Science Foundation Document Custodian Robert J. Dickman Hugh Van Horn, Comsat Corporation v. National Science Foundation National Science Foundation Document Custodian Robert J. Dickman Hugh Van Horn (1999)
14 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 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 26 U.S.C. § 6103 · 28 U.S.C. § 1442 · 5 U.S.C. § 301 · 5 U.S.C. § 702
Relies on Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Davis v. Alaska · Roviaro v. United States · United States v. Nixon · Washington v. Texas
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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a federal court's jurisdiction upon removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1) is derivative of the state court jurisdiction,”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[b]ecause defense counsel was able to cross-examine all of the trial witnessesMore-over, the petitioner here was able to gather some information via the Freedom of Information Act. See Kansi, 11 F.Supp.2d at 43 . 10 . "The head of an Executive department ... may prescribe regulations for the government of his department, the conduct of its employees, the distribution and performance of its business, and the custody, use, and preservation of its records, papers, and property. This section does not authorize withholding information from the public or limiting the availability of records to the public.” 5 U.S.C. § 301 (West 1996). 11 .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Cromer's remedy, if any, for the Justice Department's [refusal to permit its employees to testify] may be found in the [APA] . . . . "). 28 The APA waives the government's sovereign immunity from suit and permits federal court review of final agency actions, when the relief sought is other than money damages and the plaintiff has stated a claim "that an agency or an officer or employee thereof acted or failed to act in an official capacity . . . .”
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.