Curry v. Block’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2412 · 42 U.S.C. § 1475 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 1988 · 7 U.S.C. § 1981A
Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Hensley v. Eckerhart · Alyeska Pipeline Service Company v. Wilderness Society · Blum v. Stenson · Maine v. Thiboutot
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Government stresses that the nature of the Department’s responsibility was a question of first impression when this Court decided Curry v. Block. This is true. Without judicial interpretation of the statute, the legislative history and statutory language were the only law upon which the Government could draw in formulating its argument before this Court. [Citation omitted.] These sources, the statute’s language and history, pointed to only one reasonable statutory interpretation.... The novelty of the [statutory] issue did not entitle the Government to advocate an alternative, and unreasonable, interpretation of the statute.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Felton v. Brown
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.