Cooper v. U.S. Postal Service’s Empirical Analysis
577 F.3d 479 · 2009
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2024 · most notably Nicosia v. Amazon.com, Inc. (2016), Schindler v. French (2012)
10 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 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 18 U.S.C. § 1693 · 18 U.S.C. § 1729 · 39 U.S.C. § 101 (Air Carriage of International Mail Act) · 39 U.S.C. § 403 · 39 U.S.C. § 404 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc. · Flast v. Cohen · Sierra Club v. Morton · Lemon v. Kurtzman · West v. Atkins
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“For the purposes of section 1983, the actions of a nominally private entity are attributable to the state ... (1) [when] the entity acts pursuant to the coercive power of the state or is controlled by the state (“the compulsion test”); (2) when the state provides significant encouragement to the entity, the entity is a willful participant in joint activity with the state, or the entity’s functions are entwined with state policies (“the joint action test” or “close nexus test”); or (3) when the entity has been delegated a public function by the state (“the public function test”).”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[T]here are three Article III standing requirements: (1) the plaintiff must have suffered an injury-in-fact; (2) there must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct at issue; and (3) the injury must be likely to be redressed by a favorable decision.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provides: [N]or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of Law. U.S. Const, amend. XIV, § 1. By its terms, private action is immune from the restrictions of the Fourteenth Amendment,' and the Amendment offers no shield against private conduct, however discriminatory or wrongful. Jackson v. Metro. Edison Co., 419 U.S. 345, 349 , 95 S.Ct. 449 , 42 L.Ed.2d 477 (1974) (quotation marks omitted).”
1 later decision 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.