Wenger v. Monroe’s Empirical Analysis
282 F.3d 1068 · 2002
Citation profile
31
cited by 31 later decisions
November 2018
most recently cited
5 federal appellate · 5 district ·
Relationships
Relies on Paul v. Davis · Siegert v. Gilley · Arnett v. Kennedy · Wisconsin v. Constantineau · Chappell v. Wallace
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.
“). In Wenger , the Ninth Circuit looked to Gonzalez as its guide: Like Gonzalez, Wenger claims that misconduct by the Guard cost him a promotion. To determine whether a flag was appropriately placed on Wenger's record, and whether the investigation of the Dining-In incident was conducted properly, a court would have to review all the details of the placement of the flag and the conduct of the investigation. Thus, as in Gonzalez , review in this case would require a court to scrutinize numerous decisions made by various individuals, and would necessarily”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“An internal military decision is unreviewable unless the plaintiff alleges (a) a violation of [a recognized constitutional right], a federal statute, or military regulations; and (b) exhaustion of available intraservice remedies.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the state makes a charge against a plaintiff that might seriously damage his standing and associations in the community, and 1) the accuracy of'the charge is contested, 2) there is some public disclosure of the charge, and 3) it is made in connection with the termination of employment or the alteration of some right or status recognized by state law.”
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.