Crumpacker v. Andrus’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1442 · 28 U.S.C. § 2409A · 28 U.S.C. § 292 · 28 U.S.C. § 455
Relies on Minnesota v. United States · Kelsey-Hayes Co. v. Dunlop Co. · Hampton v. City of Chicago · Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Rodes · Bor-Son Building Corp. v. Heller
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“additional requests for injunctive and monetary relief do not alter the essential character of the suit.”
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.