Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 334 F.2d 570 - Carmen Gonzalez v. Orville L. Freeman

Carmen Gonzalez v. Orville L. Freeman’s Empirical Analysis

334 F.2d 570 · 1964

Citation profile

339
cited by 339 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
11
states following
November 2019
most recently cited

158 federal appellate · 47 district · 27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 339 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2019 · most notably Goldberg v. Kelly (1970), Scanwell Laboratories, Inc. v. John H. Shaffer, Administrator (Acting) of the Federal Aviation Administration (1970)

158 federal appellate · 47 district · 27 state decisions — followed in 11 states

1560196419701980199020002010decided

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

Relies on Yick Wo v. Hopkins · Cafeteria & Restaurant Workers Union, Local 473 v. McElroy · Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee v. McGrath · Greene v. McElroy · Cannon 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 339 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “, Judge (now Chief Justice) Burger wrote for the court: 41 . . . Of course there is no such right ; but that cannot mean that the government can act arbitrarily, either substantively or procedurally . . . 42 The invasion of a legally protected right also constitutes a legal wrong under the meaning of”
    13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “On this record there is neither the appearance nor the reality of fairness in the process by which debarment of appellants was accomplished. Disqualification from bidding or contracting for five years directs the power and prestige of government at a particular person and, as we have shown, may have a serious economic impact on that person. Such debarment cannot be left to administrative improvisation on a case-by-case basis. The governmental power must be exercised in accordance with accepted basic legal norms. Considerations of basic fairness require administrative regulations establishing standards for debarment and procedures which will include notice of specific charges, opportunity to present evidence and to cross-examine adverse witnesses, all culminating in administrative findings and conclusions based upon the record so made.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “immune from judicial review, if ever, only by the plainest manifestation of congressional intent to that effect.”
    5 later decisions 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.