Scherr v. Volpe’s Empirical Analysis
466 F.2d 1027 · 1972
Citation profile
74 federal appellate · 10 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 136 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2018 · most notably The Canal Authority of the State of Florida v. Howard H. Callaway, Secretary of the United States Army, the Cross-Florida Canal Association v. Howard H. Callaway, Secretary of the United States Army, Eleanor H. Miller v. Avery S. Fullerton, Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Corps of Engineers of the United States Army, J. G. Perko v. The Canal Authority of the State of Florida, Etc. (1974), City of Davis v. Coleman (1975)
74 federal appellate · 10 district · 2 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.
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 4321 (§ 2 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969) · 42 U.S.C. § 4332 (§ 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969) · 42 U.S.C. § 4334 (§ 104 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969)
Relies on Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Calvert Cliffs' Coordinating Committee, Inc. v. United States Atomic Energy Commission · Arlington Coalition on Transportation v. Volpe · Leon F. Urbain and Loxit Systems, Inc. v. Knapp Brothers Manufacturing Company, Al Levinson, Charles Levinson, and Robert Levinson
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 136 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The broad substantive policies and objectives of NEPA are contained in § 101 thereof. There the Congress expressed its basic goal that the federal government should strive for the protection of environmental values. Environmental protection was not established as an exclusive goal, rather the Congress restructured priorities in such a way that the ecological consequences of a federal action must now be given consideration. Thus § 101(b) of NEPA provides that "it is the continuing responsibility of the Federal Government to use all practical means, consistent with other essential considerations of national policy," to "assure for all Americans safe, healthful, productive, and esthetically and culturally pleasing surroundings," to attain "an environment without degradation", to "preserve important historic, cultural, and natural aspects of our national heritage," and to insure that "each person should enjoy a healthful environment." The method by which the national goals would be achieved was left undefined in Section 101. However, Congress did not simply provide us with a promise incapable of realization. Important and much less flexible procedural requirements designed to insure that federal officials meet the sweeping Congressional commitment to the environment are contained in Section 102 of NEPA. The pertinent portions of Section 102 read as follows: "The Congress authorizes and directs that, to the fullest extent possible: ... (2) all agencies of the Federal Government s”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“(c) Security. No restraining order or preliminary injunction shall issue except upon the giving of security by the applicant, in such sum as the court deems proper, for the payment of such costs and damages as may be incurred or suffered by any party who is found to have been wrongfully enjoined or restrained. * * *.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“that stage of completion where the cost of abandoning or altering the proposed project clearly outweigh(s) the benefit(s) which could flow from compliance with Section (4332).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.