Brooks v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
1939
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently October 1971
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 28 U.S.C. § 41
Relies on United States v. Germaine · Steele v. United States No. 2 · Burnap v. United States · United States v. Langston · McGrath v. United States
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * That, notwithstanding any lapse of time or statute of limitations, and notwithstanding section 1346(d) (2) of Title 28, United States Code, the United States district courts shall have jurisdiction of all civil actions or claims to recover fees, salary, or compensation for official services of employees of the United States which were filed prior to October 31, 1951, and were thereafter dismissed for want of jurisdiction as a result of the amendment made to such section by section 50(b) of the Act entitled ‘An Act to amend certain titles of the United States Code, and for other purposes’, approved October 31, 1951. “Such cases which were pending in the district courts or in the courts of appeals on October 31, 1951, and which may have been dismissed by reason of the withdrawal of jurisdiction during their pendency, shall be restored upon petition to the appropriate court within one year after the effective date of this Act.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * * [T]he Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““If anything the history would point to an intent to localize all salary suits in the Court of Claims, whether they be suits of officers or employees. However, by limiting the excluded class to ‘officers of the United States’, Congress evidenced the bounds of its intent in this direction.””
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.