Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 446 F.3d 159 - Spinelli v. Goss

Spinelli v. Goss’s Empirical Analysis

446 F.3d 159 · 2006

Citation profile

75
cited by 75 later decisions
September 2021
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 50 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently September 2021 · most notably Mathirampuzha v. Potter (2008), Wilson

9 federal appellate · 50 district ·

510200620102020decided

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 V. C O Churner · McCarthy v. Madigan · Lindahl v. Office of Personnel Management · Jerome Stevens Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Food & Drug Administration · Southwest Marine, Inc. v. Gizoni

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

  1. “her administrative complaint. 29 U.S.C. § 794a(a)(1). In Spinelli , the plaintiff was not aggrieved by a final disposition because he”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he district court ... should have dismissed [the Plaintiff's] Rehabilitation Act claim for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that he failed to exhaust his administrative remedy” because "[s]uch jurisdictional exhaustion, as we have called it, may not be excused”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Since there was no administrative complaint and thus no final disposition of one, the district court lacked jurisdiction.”
    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.