Adams v. Richardson’s Empirical Analysis
480 F.2d 1159 · 1973
Citation profile
148 federal appellate · 46 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 306 later decisions (6 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2018 · most notably Cannon v. University of Chicago (1979), Heckler v. Chaney (1985)
148 federal appellate · 46 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 28 U.S.C. § 1391 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000D · 42 U.S.C. § 2000D · 42 U.S.C. § 2000D
Relies on Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Burlington Truck Lines, Inc. v. United States · Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education · Board of Public Instruction v. Finch
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 306 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“consciously and expressly adopted a general policy”
20 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“merely require[d] initiation of a process which, [once initiated and] excepting contemptuous conduct, will then pass beyond the District Court's continuing control and supervision.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) by the termination of or refusal to grant or to continue assistance under such program or activity to any recipient as to whom there has been an express finding on the record, after opportunity for hearing, of a failure to comply with such requirement ... or (2) by any other means authorized by law____” Id. 113 . Adams v. Richardson, supra note 46, 156 U.S.App.D.C. at 271 , 480 F.2d at 1163 . 114 . Id. at 269, 480 F.2d at 1161 . 115 . In Weinberger v. Hynson, Westcott & Dunning, supra note 14 , the Supreme Court described the 1962 amendments to the FDC Act as a”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cutler v. Hayes · Brown v. Califano
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.