Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 436 F.3d 82 - Alliance for Environmental Renewal, Inc. v. Pyramid Crossgates Co.

Alliance for Environmental Renewal, Inc. v. Pyramid Crossgates Co.’s Empirical Analysis

436 F.3d 82 · 2006

Citation profile

77
cited by 77 later decisions
August 2024
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 5 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably Cortlandt Street Recovery Corp. v. Hellas Telecommunications (2015), Building and Construction Trades Council of Buffalo New York and Vicinity v. Downtown Development Inc 04-4865-Cv (2006)

9 federal appellate · 5 district ·

450200620102020decided

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 Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment · Allen v. Wright · Bell v. Hood · Bennett v. Spear · Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. Moitie

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

  1. “The Supreme Court has called Article III standing perhaps the most important of the case-or-controversy doctrines placing limits on federal judicial power. More fundamental than judicially imposed, prudential limits on the exercise of federal jurisdiction is the core component of standing derived directly from the Constitution. A plaintiff must allege personal injury fairly traceable to the defendant’s allegedly unlawful conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Although we have noted that standing challenges have sometimes been brought under Rule 12(b)(6), as well as Rule 12(b)(1), the proper procedural route is a motion under Rule 12(b)(1).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “The presentation of affidavits on a motion under Rule 12(b)(1)... does not convert the motion into a motion for summary judgment under Rule 56.”
    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.