Dominguez v. Schwarzenegger’s Empirical Analysis
596 F.3d 1087 · 2010
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 42 U.S.C. § 1396 (§ 1900 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 13961 (§ 40291 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994) · 42 U.S.C. § 1396A (§ 1902 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · United States v. Hinkson · American Trucking Associations, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles · Earth Island Institute v. United States Forest Service
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under this standard, [a]s long as the district court got the law right, it will not be reversed simply because the appellate court would have arrived at a different result if it had applied the law to the facts of the case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Farris v. Seabrook“The district court, however, necessarily abuses its discretion when it bases its decision on an erroneous legal standard or on clearly erroneous findings of fact.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Farris v. Seabrook
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.