Nixon v. Richey’s Empirical Analysis

513 F.2d 430 · 1975

Citation profile

cited by 71 later decisions

cited 2 times by the Supreme Court

states following

November 2015

most recently cited

29 federal appellate · 17 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 71 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2015 · most notably Nixon v. Administrator of General Services (1977), Piambino v. Bailey (1985)

29 federal appellate · 17 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. § 1253 · 28 U.S.C. § 2284 · 5 U.S.C. § 552 (Freedom of Information Act)

Relies on Hagans v. Lavine · Rosado v. Wyman · Sprage v. Ticonic Nat Bank · Will v. United States · Lawlor v. National Screen Service Corp.

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

“The United States District Court for the District of Columbia shall have exclusive jurisdiction to hear challenges to the legal or constitutional validity of this title or of any regulation issued under the authority granted by this title, and any action or proceeding involving the question of title, ownership, custody, possession, or control of any tape recording or material referred to in section 101 or involving payment of any just compensation which may be due in connection therewith. Any such challenge shall be treated by the court as a matter requiring immediate consideration and resolution, and such challenge shall have priority on the docket of such court over other cases.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Nixon v. Administrator of General Services · Nixon v. Sampson
“The decision of a federal appellate court establishes the law binding further action in the litigation by another body subject to its authority. The latter ‘is without power to do anything which is contrary to either the letter or spirit of the mandate construed in the light of the opinion of [the] court deciding the case’ . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Dilley v. Alexander
“Presidential historical materials of Richard M. Nixon.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Richard M. Nixon, Individually and as the Former President of the United States v. Arthur F. Sampson, Individually and as Administrator of General Services Appeal of Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (Two Cases). The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press v. Arthur F. Sampson, Individually and as Administrator of General Services. Lillian Hellman v. Arthur F. Sampson, Individually and as Administrator of General Services

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.