Gardebring v. Jenkins’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
199 federal appellate · 104 district · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 537 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2019 · most notably Thomas Jefferson University v. Shalala (1994), Cohen v. Brown University (1993)
199 federal appellate · 104 district · 36 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedSlaughter v. Levine (from Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on City of Oklahoma City v. Tuttle · Southeastern Community College v. Davis · General Electric Co. v. Gilbert · Bowen v. American Hospital Assn.
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 537 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“alternative reading is compelled by the regulation's plain language or by other indications of the Secretary's intent at the time of the regulation's promulgation.”
36 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“their rights and obligations under the program.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent““We hold the notice regulation does not impose a duty on AFDC caseworkers to advise AFDC applicants about procedures for minimizing the consequences of a lump sum award. Rather, under Gardebring , the notice regulation requires the State to provide AFDC applicants with a general written description of the basic structure of the AFDC program and the availability of AFDC benefits.””
1 later decision 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.