Studt v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
607 F.2d 1216 · 1979
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 5 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently December 1995 · most notably Kulkin v. Bergland (1980), Willy's Grocery v. United States (1981)
11 federal appellate · 5 district ·
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. § 1442 · 7 U.S.C. § 2011 (Charitable Assistance and Food Bank Act of 1987) · 7 U.S.C. § 2023
Relies on Cross 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]f the court determines that such administrative action is invalid, it shall enter such judgment or order as it determines is in accordance with the law and the evidence.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Only where the Department of Agriculture has acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner in imposing a sanction may the district court alter the sanction.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he district court is authorized to conduct a de novo review of the validity of the Department of Agriculture’s determination that the Food Stamp Act has been violated. A more limited scope of review applies, however, when the administrative determination that a violation has occurred is valid and the challenge is to the sanction imposed on the violator of the Act____ [T]he district court must limit its review to a determination of whether the sanction imposed on the violator is arbitrary and capricious.”
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.