Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 187 F.3d 263 - Joseph McNeil John Blankenship, Kevin O'DOnnell and United States of America

Joseph McNeil John Blankenship, Kevin O'DOnnell and United States of America’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
states following
September 2023
most recently cited

5 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently September 2023 · most notably National Mining Association v. Department of Labor, In Re Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether Products Liability Litigation (2007)

5 district · 1 state decisions

1801999200020102020decided

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 Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment · Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay

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.

  1. “the otherwise unappealable issue is inextricably intertwined with the appealable one, or . . . review of the otherwise unappealable issue is necessary to ensure meaningful review of the appealable one.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “For a court to pronounce upon the meaning or the constitutionality of a state or federal law when it has no jurisdiction to do so is, by very definition, for a court to act ultra vires. "). Indeed, there are sound policy reasons for tackling the issue at this stage, as "[i]t is surely in the interest of judicial economy to determine now whether the federal courts continue to have subject matter jurisdiction over [a] controversy [subject to an interlocutory appeal].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “We need not decide whether a broad-based, facial constitutional attack on an FAA policy or procedure — in contrast to a complaint about the agency’s particular actions in a specific case — might constitute appropriate subject matter for a stand-alone federal suit.” Id. at 271 (emphasis added). 8 . The Court does not suggest that Congress is free to restrict judicial review of constitutional challenges to agency action however it sees fit; a”
    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.