350 F. Supp. 310 - Kisner v. Butz’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently August 2003
4 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions
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 16 U.S.C. § 528 (Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960) · 16 U.S.C. § 529 · 16 U.S.C. § 531 · 16 U.S.C. § 532 · 16 U.S.C. § 535 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 42 U.S.C. § 4321 (§ 2 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969) · 42 U.S.C. § 4331 (§ 101 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969)
Relies on Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation · Burlington Truck Lines, Inc. v. United States · United States v. Morgan · Calvert Cliffs' Coordinating Committee, Inc. v. United States Atomic Energy Commission
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The statutory clause “major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment” is to be construed by agencies with a view to the overall, cumulative impact of the action proposed,. related Federal actions and projects in the area, and further actions contemplated .... In considering what constitutes major action significantly affecting the environment, agencies should bear in mind that the effect of many Federal decisions about a project or complex of projects can be individually limited but cumulatively considerable.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Simmans v. Grant“(i) the environmental impact of the proposed action, (ii) any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented, (iii) alternatives to the proposed action, (iv) the relationship between local short-term uses of man’s environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and (v) any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Sierra Club v. Hodel
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.