Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 543 F.2d 1284 - Pascal v. United States

Pascal v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

543 F.2d 1284 · 1976

Citation profile

64
cited by 64 later decisions
1
states following
January 2006
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently January 2006 · most notably Brewer v. United States Postal Service (1981), Schapansky v. Department of Transportation (1984)

11 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

4301976198019902000decided

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 Sternberger v. United States · Grover v. United States · Power v. United States · Gratehouse v. United States · Power 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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “But it is not the principle of the government world that everything is permissible which is not specifically prohibited by regulation or statute. Much is left to the common understanding that work-time is for work and those activities directly related to work — not for personal recreation or personal concerns. Plaintiff, a GS-12 revenue agent of substantial experience, must have known this. We agree with the Appeals Examining Office that "Mr. Pascal has been an employee of the Federal Government for approximately five and one-half (5-%) years. We find it beyond belief that an employee with 5- % years of service would believe that he could travel for his own personnal [sic] pleasure on government time.” [ 211 Ct. Cl. at 188-89 , 543 F.2d at 1287-88 .]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “In determining whether [the agency’s] decision is supported by substantial evidence, the standard is not what the court would believe on a de novo appraisal, but whether the administrative determination is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “crucial point is that the plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that the [agency] would have been impervious if the proof failed to show that the facts were as charged.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.