Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 278 F.3d 1184 - Tennessee Valley Authority v. United States Environmental Protection Agency

Tennessee Valley Authority v. United States Environmental Protection Agency’s Empirical Analysis

278 F.3d 1184 · 2002

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
October 2012
most recently cited

12 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 12 U.S.C. § 1828 · 16 U.S.C. § 792 (§ 1 of the Federal Power Act of 1920) · 16 U.S.C. § 831 (Tennessee Valley Authority Act of 1933) · 16 U.S.C. § 8B · 28 U.S.C. § 509 (Justice Department Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Enhancement Act of 1988) · 28 U.S.C. § 519 · 42 U.S.C. § 7401 (Air Quality Act of 1967) · 42 U.S.C. § 7409

Relies on Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment · Baker v. Carr · Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc.

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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[w]hen ... a plaintiffs asserted injury arises from the government’s allegedly unlawful regulation (or lack of regulation) of someone else, much more is needed.... The existence of one or more of the essential elements of standing depends on the unfettered choices made by independent actors not before the courts and whose exercise of broad and legitimate discretion the courts cannot presume either to control or predict ... it becomes the burden of the plaintiff to adduce facts showing that those choices have been or will be made in such a manner as to produce causation and permit redressability of injury.”
    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.