Baum v. Zuckert’s Empirical Analysis
342 F.2d 145 · 1965
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently August 1984 · most notably Kletschka v. Driver (1969), Charlton v. United States (1969)
17 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 Braunfeld v. Gibbons · Tennessee Burley Tobacco Growers' Ass'n v. Range · Newell M. Hargett v. Arthur E. Summerfield · International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers v. United States · Powell v. Branman
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The function of a reviewing court in cases involving the discharge of civil service employees is a limited one. Powell v. Brannan, 91 U.S.App. D.C. 16, 196 F.2d 871, 873 . The judicial function is to determine whether there has been substantial compliance with applicable procedures and statutes, and not to review the administrative determination as to the wisdom or good judgment of the agency in exercising discretion. Hargett v. Summerfield, 100 U.S.App.D.C. 85 , 243 F.2d 29, 32 , cert. denied, 353 U.S. 970 , 77 S.Ct. 1060 , 1 L.Ed.2d 1137 . The courts will not examine into the merits of the dismissal. Ellis v. Mueller, 108 U.S.App.D.C. 174 , 280 F. 2d 722 , cert. denied, 364 U.S. 883 , 81 S.Ct. 172 , 5 L.Ed.2d 104 ; Green v. Baughman, 100 U.S.App.D.C. 187 , 243 F.2d 610, 613 , cert. denied, 355 U.S. 819 , 78 S.Ct. 25 , 2 L.Ed.2d 35 .” at page 147 of 342 F.2d.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The ultimate test of standard which will be applied to the adverse action taken against appellant [plaintiff] is whether or not it was taken “for such cause as will promote the efficiency of the service” (Civil Service Regulation 752, Section 752.104(a)).”
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.