Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 595 F.2d 59 - Chasse v. Chasen

Chasse v. Chasen’s Empirical Analysis

595 F.2d 59 · 1979

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
August 2014
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 6 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably Schism v. United States (2002), Sheehan v. Army & Air Force Exchange Service (1980)

21 federal appellate · 6 district ·

18019791980199020002010decided

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 Bell v. Hood · Scalza v. United States · Hawaii v. Gordon · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Zabala Clemente v. United States

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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “In essence, the court concurs with the district judge that in deciding whether a particular agency policy pronouncement may properly serve as the basis of jurisdiction under Section 1331(a) ... we examine: (I) the statutory authority for promulgation and (II) the formality of the promulgation. We weigh these factors to decide whether the policy pronouncement may be used as a basis of a suit in the federal courts.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[I]n deciding whether a particular agency policy pronouncement may properly serve as the basis of jurisdiction under either [28 U.S.C.] § 1331(a) or [28 U.S.C.] 1346(a)(2), we examine: (I) the statutory authorization for promulgation, and (II) the formality of the promulgation. We weigh these factors to decide whether the policy pronouncement may be used as a basis of a suit in the federal courts.”
    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.