Hagopian v. Knowlton’s Empirical Analysis
470 F.2d 201 · 1972
Citation profile
37 federal appellate · 7 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 73 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2021 · most notably Goss v. Lopez (1975), United States ex rel. Miller v. Twomey (1973)
37 federal appellate · 7 district · 3 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 10 U.S.C. § 4348 · 10 U.S.C. § 673A · 28 U.S.C. § 1292
Relies on Goldberg v. Kelly · Mempa v. Rhay · Orloff v. Willoughby · Hannah v. Larche · Opp Cotton Mills, Inc. v. Administrator of the Wage & Hour Division of the Department of Labor
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 73 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In approaching the question of what process is due before governmental action adversely affecting private interests may properly be taken, it must be recognized that due process is not a rigid formula or simple rule of thumb to be applied undeviatingly to any given set of facts. On the contrary, it is a flexible concept which depends upon the balancing of various factors * * *. The full context must therefore be considered in each case.” See also: United States ex rel. Martinez v. Alldredge (1972), 468 F.2d 684, at 687 , cert. denied, 412 U.S. 920 (1973).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * * With a cadet population of several thousand, it is unlikely that the members of the Board, drawn from several departments, would have a sufficient acquaintanceship with the cadet to be able to appraise him or determine his "potential for retention” merely on the basis of his letter to it. The opportunity to bring witnesses to appear in his behalf may also strengthen the impact of his case above the frail impression which a written submission would make. * * *”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The Cadet must be apprised of the specific charges against him. He must be given an adequate opportunity to present his defense both from the point of view of time and the use of witnesses and other evidence. The hearing may be procedurally informal and need not be adversarial.” (Emphasis supplied in Hagopian, supra.) 470 F.2d at 210 .”
1 later decision 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.