American Federation of Government Employees v. Hoffman’s Empirical Analysis
543 F.2d 930 · 1976
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently July 2010
7 federal appellate · 3 district ·
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 Bowman Transportation, Inc. v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc. · Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc. · McKart v. United States · Greater Boston Television Corporation v. Federal Communications Commission, Whdh, Inc., a Massachusettscorporation, Intervenor. Whdh, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Greater Boston Televisioncorporation, a Massachusetts Corporation, Intervenor. Charles River Civic Television, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Whdh, Inc., Boston Broadcastersinc., Intervenors. Whdh, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Boston Broadcasters, Inc., Intervenor. Greater Boston Tv Co., Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Whdh, Inc., Boston Broadcastersinc., Intervenors · Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Wichita Board of Trade
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In a letter dated June 25, 1957, the Civil Service Commission (CSC) authorized the Ar Force to proceed with its Ar Reserve Technician plan (hereinafter ART). The primary goal of the plan was to increase the combat readiness of Air Force Reserve units, as well as their effectiveness in the event of mobilization. Prior to ART, the Air Reserve Flying Centers utilized for training Air Reserve Wings were maintained and operated by Air Force units which were composed of approximately half military and half civilian personnel and were organizationally separate from the reserve wings.- ART, by replacing military support personnel with civil servants and requiring civilian support personnel to be active reserve members, in effect integrated the support organizations into the Air Reserve Wings. In their civilian capacity, ART incumbents were to provide the basic maintenance and supply functions previously provided by the support organization; in their military capacity, ART employees were to provide training for the remainder of the wing personnel, who reported only on weekends and during summer active duty tours. Since this “hard core” of highly skilled reservists would be available for immediate mobilization, the Air Force anticipated that combat readiness would be enhanced.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bowers v. Wynne“Technicians are an integral part of the Amy Reserve and they possess certain skills essential to the unit if it should be called to active duty. Since the transition from a Reserve status to active duty is critical, dual status personnel, who have been working for the unit and are familiar with unit administrative requirements are employed when the unit is mobilized to enable the critical functions to be performed effectively. When a substitute must replace a technician who does not accompany his unit, the function performed will suffer in some degree.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bowers v. Wynne
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.