Cherry v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
594 F.2d 795 · 1979
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 1035 · 25 U.S.C. § 348 · 28 U.S.C. § 1491 · 28 U.S.C. § 2509 · 28 U.S.C. § 2680 · 37 U.S.C. § 552 · 37 U.S.C. § 553
Relies on Goldberg v. Kelly · United States v. Testan · Feres v. United States · Eastport Steamship Corp. v. United States · American Power & Light Co. v. Securities & Exchange Commission
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The court has not pointed to any passage in the Missing Persons Act which creates “expressly or by implication” the statutory authorization for a trust which it required in Mitchell as the “substantive right” which mandates compensation. It is very important to note in this connection that in Mitchell the holding that the statute authorized suit for monetary recovery was based on an implication which derived from the statute’s express declaration of a trust. It is the absence of the latter which here deprives the court of the analogy it seeks to establish.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow, and his orphan.” Abraham Lincoln, Second Inaugural Address (March 4, 1865). The Act authorizes continuation of pay and allowances to members of the armed forces missing in action, 37 U.S.C. § 552 , and allows the respective Armed Services’ Secretaries or their designee to initiate, discontinue, or alter pay allotments authorized in advance by the serviceman for his dependents”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“special pay” and flight hazard pay from allotments to dependents, but counsel fails to provide us with a text of that regulation, as required by Court of Claims Rule 124. In addition, there is a discrepancy in the record as to the percentage of his pay Colonel Cherry claims to have allotted to his wife. Colonel Cherry contends that the Air Force relied on a”
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.