Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 604 FSUPP 880 - Shaw v. Gwatney

Shaw v. Gwatney’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
1
states following
August 1991
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1491 · 32 U.S.C. § 708

Relies on Perry v. Sindermann · Carey v. Piphus · Goss v. Lopez · Curtis v. Loether · Codd v. Velger

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

  1. “Not only was it unnecessary for the court to resolve the merits, it was inappropriate. Courts in such cases should be interpreters of the Constitution, and not arbiters of every employment decision. If the adjudication of every due process claim required a court to examine and decide the merits of the underlying claim of entitlement, court intrusion into substantive employment and administrative decisions would greatly expand. Courts do not have the time, the expertise or the authority to take on comprehensive roles as employment decision makers. The focus in the first instance must therefore be upon the precise relief being sought.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “jurisdiction is determined by reference to the time of the institution of the action.”
    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.