Simons v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
497 F.2d 1046 · 1974
Citation profile
45 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably Harold FRANKS, Plaintiff-Appellant, Johnny Lee, Intervenor-Appellant, v. BOWMAN TRANSPORTATION COMPANY Et Al., Defendants-Appellees (1974), Roth v. Veteran's Administration of the Government of the United States (1988)
45 federal appellate · 2 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 19 U.S.C. § 1608 (Tariff Act of 1930) · 19 U.S.C. § 1609 (Tariff Act of 1930) · 19 U.S.C. § 1613 (Tariff Act of 1930) · 26 U.S.C. § 5841 (§ 201 of the Gun Control Act of 1968) · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act)
Relies on Foman v. Davis · Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Ottis Mayo Jones v. Gertrude Bales · United States v. One 1961 Red Chevrolet Impala Sedan, Serial No. 11837A177369 · Stanley J. Breier, Dba Bayshore Bowl v. Northern California Bowling Proprietors' Association, a Corporation, Monument Bowl, Inc., a California Corporation v. Northern California Bowling Proprietors' Association, a Corporation
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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If the underlying facts or circumstances relied upon by a plaintiff may be a proper subject of relief, he ought to be afforded an opportunity to test his claim on the merits. In the absence of any apparent or declared reason such as undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendment previously allowed, undue prejudice to the opposing party by virtue of allowance of the amendment, futility of amendment, etc. the leave sought should, as the rules require, be `freely given.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“While the Secretary has been given sole power to mitigate the effects of proper forfeiture, he has not been given sole power to determine the propriety of the forfeitures themselves.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[u]nder the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(2), recovery may be had for penalties wrongfully exacted.”
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.