Young v. Young’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently October 2011
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 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. § 1441 · 42 U.S.C. § 659 (§ 459 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Willingham v. Morgan · Overman v. United States · The May Department Stores Company v. James Edward Smith, Veterans Administration, Garnishee. The May Department Stores Company v. Mable M. Walton, Veterans Administration, Garnishee · Quarles Petroleum Co. v. United States · United States v. Coran
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“§ 659 abrogates sovereign immunity to the extent of lawful garnishments, whether or not the government complies with its obligation to withhold. Thus the government is liable for any funds it failed to withhold, plus interest. Although this money is no longer “due” or payable to the employee, it was payable at the time of the garnishment and rightfully belonged to the plaintiff through operation of § 659. Having in effect transferred funds which it did not have a right to transfer [the government] must make restitution.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The substantive issue presented by this case is whether under § 659, a federal employer may be held liable for the entire debt or judgment underlying a garnishment, or whether the statute waives sovereign immunity only as to the appropriate portion of wages owed but not yet paid to a federal employee.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“cannot be reconciled with even the most liberal construction of a statute which authorizes garnishment of wages 'due' or 'payable.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Loftin v. Rush
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.