Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 505 F.2d 857 - Sims v. E L

Sims v. E L’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

69
cited by 69 later decisions
5
states following
November 2015
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 21 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently November 2015 · most notably Fiorentino v. United States (1979), BenShalom v. Secretary of Army (1980)

1 federal appellate · 21 district · 8 state decisions

31019701980199020002010decided

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

Relies on Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Perry v. Sindermann · Arnett v. Kennedy · Wisconsin v. Constantineau · Schware v. Board of Bar Examiners of NM

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

  1. “The statute specifically negates the right of a reserve officer to continued employment; reserve officers may be discharged “at the pleasure of the President,” 10 U.S.C. § 1162 . Thus, the statute explicitly provides that one has no vested right to continue in the employment of the United States Armed Forces. One who may be discharged “at the pleasure” of another; i.e. arbitrarily, for no cause whatsoever, simply has no property right to continued employment. The statute could not have expressed that proviso in any more specific terms. Sims v. Fox, 505 F.2d 857, 861 (5th Cir. 1974), cert. den. 421 U.S. 1011 , 95 S.Ct. 2415 , 44 L.Ed.2d 678 (1975).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “To have a property interest in a benefit, a person clearly must have more than an abstract need or desire for it. He must have more than a unilateral expectation of it. He must, instead, have a legitimate claim of entitlement to it. . . Property interests . . . are created ... by existing rules or understandings that stem from an independent source such as state law — rules or understandings that secure certain benefits and that support claims of entitlement to those benefits.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “In brief, Roth teaches that the government’s attack on one’s reputation may infringe constitutionally protected liberty in two respects: (1) governmental degradation of one’s standing in his community may be a denial of ‘liberty’; (2) governmental communication of derogatory information to employers may be an attack on ‘liberty’.”
    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.