48 Fed. Cl. 187 - Castle v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 12 U.S.C. § 1441A · 12 U.S.C. § 1819 · 12 U.S.C. § 1821 · 12 U.S.C. § 1821A · 28 U.S.C. § 2501 · 28 U.S.C. § 2516
Relies on Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill · United States v. Sherwood · Arnett v. Kennedy · Story Parchment Co. v. Paterson Parchment Paper Co. · United States v. Winstar Corp.
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Wjithout a capital infusion in January 1990, Western Empire would have fallen out of capital compliance and been subject to seizure.... A key component of plaintiffs’ damages models, then, turns on the court’s willingness to accept the premise that plaintiffs would have invested an additional $10 million to keep Western Empire afloat.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“The contract performance that was promised was the granting of special regulatory forbearances which the government agreed to extend to the bank. And while plaintiffs could, of course, expect to benefit from that performance as the value of the bank grew, they held no rights to that performance for themselves.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.