Household Credit Services, Inc. v. Pfennig’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
99 federal appellate · 50 district · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 381 later decisions (18 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2023 · most notably National Cable & Telecommunications Assn. v. Brand X Internet Services (2005), Gonzales v. Oregon (2006)
99 federal appellate · 50 district · 14 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedPfennig v. Household Credit Services, Inc. (from Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1601 (§ 102 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1602 (§ 103 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1605 (§ 106 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1637 (§ 127 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1640 (§ 130 of the Truth in Lending Act)
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · United States v. Mead Corp. · Mart Corporation v. Cartier Inc 47th Street Photo Inc · Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Milhollin · Norwegian Nitrogen Products Co. v. United States
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 381 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“arbitrary or capricious in substance, or manifestly contrary to the statute.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“arbitrary, capricious, or manifestly contrary to the statute”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“[WJhenever Congress has ‘explicitly left a gap for the agency to fill,’ the agency’s regulation is 'given controlling weight unless [it is] arbitrary, capricious, or manifestly contrary to the statute.’ ”) (citing Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 , 843-44, 104 S.Ct. 2778 , 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984)). Therefore, the regulations will be deemed controlling. 8 . While NLG argues that NLG and Gamble Insulation”
5 later decisions 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.