Feikema’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 6 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently January 2022 · most notably 103 F. Supp. 2d 1322 - Brogdon Ex Rel. Cline v. National Healthcare Corp. (2000), 979 F. Supp. 416 - At&T Wireless PCs, Inc. v. City Council of City of Virginia Beach (1997)
1 federal appellate · 6 district ·
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 San Diego Building Trades Council v. Garmon · Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp. · Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc. · M'Culloch v. State of Maryland · Fidelity Federal Savings and Loan Association v. D Cuesta
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Regardless of the type of tort suit brought by plaintiffs, the defendant is required by federal law ... to comply with the methodology provided in the ROD. Allowance of the suit for monetary damages [for EPA’s inadequate remedy selection] would mean that the PRP could then be held liable for failing to use methods that it was prevented by law from using. Imposing a damage claim on the defendant would be a direct usurpation of the EPA’s statutory authority to determine which remedies are adequate to protect human health and would conflict with a judicially enforceable order. Simply put, “common-law damages actions are preempted to the same extent as common-law injunctive suits.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“) investigated the leak. Pursuant to the direction of the State Board, Texaco conducted tests on the tanks and the lines, installed on-site and off-site monitoring wells, and installed an oil recovery trench along a portion of the Tank Farm. Although almost 7,000 gallons of oil were recovered by these means, the State Board concluded that leaking was continuing and that the appropriate control or elimination of such release had not been implemented. In May 1991, the State Board requested that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (the”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“) assume responsibility for investigating the oil leak and recovering the released products. In response, the EPA created an interagency task force to take further steps. 4 Proceeding under the authority granted by section 311(c) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. Sec. 1321 (c), section 1431 of the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 300i, and section 7003 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (”
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.