Anderson v. Evans’s Empirical Analysis
371 F.3d 475 · 2002
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 15 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center v. Bureau of Land Management (2004), Bering Strait Citizens for Responsible Resource Development v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (2008)
14 federal appellate · 15 district · 1 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
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Friends of the Earth Incorporateds v. Laidlaw Environmental Services Inc · Marsh v. Oregon Natural Resources Council · Honig v. Doe · Weinstein v. Bradford
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(4) The degree to which the effects on the quality of the human environment are likely to be highly controversial. (5) The degree to which the possible effects on the human environment are highly uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks. (7) Whether the action is related to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts. Significance exists if it is reasonable to anticipate a cumulatively significant impact on the environment. Significance cannot be avoided by terming an action temporary or by breaking it down into small component parts. (10) Whether the action threatens a violation of Federal, State, or local law or requirements imposed for the protection of the environment.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Before deciding whether to complete an EIS, government agencies may prepare a less formal EA which 'briefly provides sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an environmental impact statement or a finding of no significant impact.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he degree to which the action may adversely affect . . . objects listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places or may cause loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historical resources,”
2 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.