Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 432 F.2d 637 - Williams v. Robinson

Williams v. Robinson’s Empirical Analysis

432 F.2d 637 · 1970

Citation profile

49
cited by 49 later decisions
6
states following
September 2009
most recently cited

26 federal appellate · 5 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently September 2009 · most notably Ethyl Corporation v. Environmental Protection Agency, Ppg Industries, Inc. v. Environmental Protection Agency, E. I. Dupont De Nemours & Company v. Environmental Protection Agency, Nalco Chemical Company v. Environmental Protection Agency, National Petroleum Refiners Association v. Environmental Protection Agency (1976), Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Ruckelshaus (1971)

26 federal appellate · 5 district · 9 state decisions

3901970198019902000decided

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 Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Gault · Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation · Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp. of Bay View · Phelps Dodge Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board

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

  1. “[w]e do not suggest that the court should or can decide what particular treatment this patient requires. The court’s function here resembles ours when we review agency action. We do not decide whether the agency has made the best decision, but only make sure that it has made a permissible and reasonable decision in view of the relevant information and within a broad range of discretion.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““except as noted below, when a patient at Saint Elizabeths seeks to challenge the legality of hospital decisions regarding the treatment accorded him or the manner of his confinement, the hospital may not rely upon information or explanations not in the patient’s hospital record to justify its decision.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[o]ccasionally, developments subsequent to the administrative determination may warrant the presentation of additional factual material”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.