Seacoast Anti-Pollution League v. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Empirical Analysis
598 F.2d 1221 · 1979
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 10 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently September 2013 · most notably 52 Cal. 3d 553 - Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990), Amstar Corporation v. Domino's Pizza Inc (1980)
14 federal appellate · 10 district · 3 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 28 U.S.C. § 2342 · 42 U.S.C. § 2239 (Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009) · 42 U.S.C. § 4332 (§ 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969)
Relies on Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Interstate Commerce Commission v. Jersey City · Monroe County Conservation Council, Inc. v. Volpe · Seacoast Anti-Pollution League v. Costle · Bangor and Aroostook Railroad Company v. Interstate Commerce Commission, Maine Central Railroad Company, Intervenors. Maine Central Railroad Company v. United States of America, and Interstate Commerce Commission, Bangor and Aroostook Railroad Company, Intervenor. Robert W. Meserve and Benjamin H. Lacy, Trustees of the Property of Boston and Maine Corporation, Debtor v. United States of America, and Interstate Commerce 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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]hile it is true that NEPA places upon an agency the obligation to consider every significant aspect of the environmental impact of a proposed action, it is still incumbent upon intervenors who wish to participate to structure their participation so that it is meaningful, so that it alerts the agency to the intervenors’ position and contentions.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“an agency must on its own initiative study all alternatives that appear reasonable and appropriate for study at the time, and must also look into other significant alternatives that are called to its attention by other agencies, or by the public during the comment period afforded for that purpose.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“limited . . . by the time at which the decision was made.”
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.