Robinson v. McAlister’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate ·

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

1. ““In Shaughnessy v. Pedreiro, 349 U.S. 48, 51 , 75 S.Ct. 591 , 90 L.Ed. 868 , we referred to ‘the generous review provisions’ of that Act; and in that case as well as in others (see Rusk v. Cort, 369 U.S. 367, 379-380 , 82 S.Ct. 787 , 7 L.Ed.2d 809 ) we have construed that Act not grudgingly but as serving a broadly remedial purpose. “We read § 701(a) as sympathetic to the issue presented in this case. As stated in the House Report: “ ‘The statutes of Congress are not merely advisory when they relate to administrative agencies, any more than in other cases. To preclude judicial review under this bill a statute, if not specific in withholding such review, must upon its face give clear and convincing evidence of an intent to withhold it. The mere failure to provide specially by statute for judicial review is certainly no evidence of intent to withhold review.’ H.R.Rep. No. 1980, 79th Cong., 2d Sess., 41.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 366 F. Supp. 1233 - Law v. United States Department of Agriculture