Door v. Donaldson’s Empirical Analysis
195 F.2d 764 · 1952
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 6 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2001 · most notably Roth v. United States (1957), Manual Enterprises, Inc. v. Day (1962)
23 federal appellate · 6 district · 6 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 5 U.S.C. § 1001 · 5 U.S.C. § 1004
Relies on Wong Yang Sung v. McGrath · Perry v. Perry · Cates v. Haderlein · Walker v. Popenoe
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the Act exempts from the requirement of a full hearing, because they “rest solely on inspections” only decisions that turn either upon physical facts as to which there is little room for difference of opinion, or else upon technical facts like the quality of tea or the condition of airplanes, as to which administrative hearings have long been thought unnecessary. The nature of appellant’s films was not even plainly visible without the use of somewhat elaborate projection machinery. [Id. at 190, 195 F.2d at 766 .]”
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.