Tillison v. Gregoire’s Empirical Analysis
424 F.3d 1093 · 2005
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2201 · 49 U.S.C. § 14501
Relies on Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr · New York State Conference of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers Insurance · City of Columbus v. Ours Garage & Wrecker Service, Inc. · Independent Towers Of Washington v. State Of Washington
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““to further the safety of the general public by ensuring that a private property owner or lessee has provided his or her authorization for the removal of a vehicle from his or her property, thereby promoting the safety of those persons involved in ordering the removal of the vehicle as well as those persons removing, towing, and storing the vehicle.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent a State from requiring that, in the case of a motor vehicle to be towed from private property without the consent of the owner or operator of the vehicle, the person towing the vehicle have prior written authorization from the property owner or lessee (or an employee or agent thereof) or that such owner or lessee (or an employee or agent thereof) be present at the time the vehicle is towed from the property, or both.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Absent clear Congressional intent, a presumption exists that a statute does not operate retroactively. Retroactive application of a statute is improper if such application “would impair rights a party possessed when [the party] acted, increase a party’s liability for past conduct, or impose new duties with respect to transactions already completed.” Landgraf v. USI Film Prods., 511 U.S. 244, 280 , 114 S.Ct. 1483 , 128 L.Ed.2d 229 (1994).”
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.