Citizens for Better Forestry v. Department of Agriculture’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

65 federal appellate · 33 district · 1 state decisions

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

1. “To satisfy the injury in fact requirement, a plaintiff asserting a procedural injury must show that the procedures in question are designed to protect some threatened concrete interest of his that is the ultimate basis of his standing.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 664 F. Supp. 2d 1192 - Slockish v. US Federal Highway Admin. · City of Sausalito v. O'Neill

2. “is tied to a substantive harm to the environment—the harm consists of added risk to the environment that takes place when governmental decisionmakers make up their minds without having before them an analysis (with public comment) of the likely effects of their decision on the environment.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Citizens for Clean Energy v. U.S. Dep't of the Interior · Center for Biological Diversity v. Brennan

3. “[E]nvironmental plaintiffs adequately allege injury in fact when they aver that they use the affected area and are persons `for whom the aesthetic and recreational value of the area will be lessened' by the challenged activity.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 632 F. Supp. 2d 968 - Citizens for Better Forestry v. U.S. Department of Agriculture · 664 F. Supp. 2d 1192 - Slockish v. US Federal Highway Admin.