Tindall v. Hardin’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 7 U.S.C. § 2011 (Charitable Assistance and Food Bank Act of 1987) · 7 U.S.C. § 2016 · 7 U.S.C. § 2019 · 7 U.S.C. § 2025
Relies on Goldberg v. Kelly · Bell v. Hood · J. I. Case Co. v. Borak · Sullivan v. Little Hunting Park, Inc. · Witmer 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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the effect of this Court’s holding as a precedent (particularly if upheld on appeal) will be honored by the respective State and federal administrators, and that they will doubtless make appropriate voluntary forward adjustments in the cases of other affected parties not participating in this litigation after the legal issues in controversy shall have been authoritatively settled. Tindall v. Hardin, 337 F.Supp. 563, 567 (W.D.Pa.1972), aff’d, [Carter v. Butz,] 479 F.2d 1084 (3rd Cir. 1973).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hess v. Hughes“The coupons are accepted at face value by grocery concerns approved to participate in the plan, and are eventually redeemed at face value by the federal government.”
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.