Briscoe v. Bell’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
137 federal appellate · 29 district · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 306 later decisions (16 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2025 · most notably Osborn v. Haley (2007), Morris v. Gressette (1977)
137 federal appellate · 29 district · 21 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedBriscoe v. Levi (from District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1447 · 29 U.S.C. § 159 (§ 9 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 1973B (§ 4 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965) · 42 U.S.C. § 1973L (§ 14 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965)
Relies on Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Leedom v. Kyne · Thermtron Products, Inc. v. Hermansdorfer · South Carolina v. Katzenbach · Dunlop v. Bachowski
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 306 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Where the order is based on one of the enumerated grounds, review is unavailable no matter how plain the legal error in ordering the remand.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“language is absolute on its face and would appear to admit of no exceptions”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Saxton v. Fed. Hous. Fin. Agency · Wilmington United Neighborhoods, Edith Beck, John J. And Frances Bradley, Joseph J. Breen, Thomas X. Carroll, Joseph G. Dipinto, Ethel B. Tynes, Alice Wilson v. United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Amos M. Burke, as Director of the Bureau of Health Planning and Resources Development, Robert H. Sweeney, Delaware Health Council, Inc., Wilmington Medical Center, Inc. (d.c. Civil No. 77-0439). Wilmington Medical Center, Inc., a Non-Profit Corporation of the State of Delaware v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., as Secretary of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare and Wilmington United Neighborhoods, (Defendant-Intervenor), (d.c. Civil No. 77-0480)“[E]ach case raising an administrative re-viewability question must be analyzed on the basis of the specific statutory provisions involved. If the intent of Congress is unmistakable — ... the only remaining issue is whether prohibiting judicial review is constitutionally permissible. (Emphasis added)”
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.