Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 49 FEDCL 635 - Favreau v. United States

Favreau v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
May 2010
most recently cited

Relationships

Applies 10 U.S.C. § 1169 · 10 U.S.C. § 2005 · 28 U.S.C. § 1491 · 37 U.S.C. § 308 · 37 U.S.C. § 308A · 38 U.S.C. § 308 · 5 U.S.C. § 553 (Administrative Procedure Act of 1946)

Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · United States v. Mead Corp. · Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital · Rust v. Sullivan

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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “I fully understand that continued entitlement to the Enlistment Bonus may be terminated and a pro-rata portion of my Enlistment Bonus may be recouped if I am considered not technically qualified in the bonus specialty... because (a) I am no longer classified in that NEC ... for any of the following reasons within my control: ... loss of any other mandatory qualification for effective performance ... when such ... loss is voluntary....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “to the Assistant Secretary of Defense (MRA & L), who, at the time, was Lawrence Korb. Id. He was the only individual with the authority necessary to change the agency's recoupment policy. The Korb memo is in fact listed as one of the sources in the bibliography to the FMR's pay provisions. See DoD FMR Vol. 7A, Bibliography, B-10 (July 1996). 16 Plaintiffs also argue that the use of”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “in order to, among other things, further his or her education, because he or she is a sole surviving son or daughter, or a conscientious objector. See AFI 36-3208, Ch. 3, Section B, ¶ 3.18, ¶ 3.12, ¶ 3.16 (14 October 1994). 7 Until March 10, 1992, the Air Force and Marine Corps separated members who failed weight standards under the category”
    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.