United States v. Atlantic Research Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
141 federal appellate · 66 district · 35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 512 later decisions (11 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2026 · most notably Ricci v. DeStefano (2009), Cone v. Bell (2009)
141 federal appellate · 66 district · 35 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
reviewedAtlantic Research Corp. v. United States (from Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 9601 (§ 101 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980) · 42 U.S.C. § 9607 (§ 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980) · 42 U.S.C. § 9613 (§ 113 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980)
Relies on Texas Industries, Inc. v. Radcliff Materials, Inc. · Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. Transport Workers Union · King v. St. Vincent's Hospital · Key Tronic Corp. v. United States · Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Mottley
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 512 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Any person may seek contribution from any other person who is liable or potentially liable under [§ 107(a) ] of this title, during or following any civil action ... under [§ 107(a) ] of this title. ... In resolving contribution claims, the court may allocate response costs among liable parties using such equitable factors as the court determines are appropriate.”
32 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We do not suggest that §§ 107(a)(4)(B) and 113(f) have no overlap at all. Key Tronic Corp. v. United States, 511 U.S. 809 , 816, 114 S.Ct. 1960 , 128 L.Ed.2d 797 (1994) (stating the statutes provide “similar and somewhat overlapping remedies]”). For instance, we recognize that a PRP may sustain expenses pursuant to a consent decree following a suit under § 106 or § 107(a). See, e.g., United Technologies Corp. v. Browning- Ferris Industries, Inc., 33 F.3d 96 , 97 (1st Cir.1994). In such a case, the PRP does not incur costs voluntarily but does not reimburse the costs of another party. We do not decide whether these compelled costs of response are recoverable under § 113(f), § 107(a), or both.”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“A person who has resolved its liability to the United States or a State in an administrative or judicially approved settlement shall not be liable for claims for contribution regarding matters addressed in the settlement. Such settlement does not discharge any of the other potentially liable persons unless its terms so provide, but it reduces the potential liability of the others by the amount of the settlement. 42 U.S.C. § 9613 (f)(2).”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.