Hark v. Dragon’s Empirical Analysis
611 F.2d 11 · 1979
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1343 · 29 U.S.C. § 801 · 29 U.S.C. § 811 · 29 U.S.C. § 823 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Hagans v. Lavine · Chapman v. Houston Welfare Rights Organization · Jones v. Califano · Goetz v. Ansell
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under the circumstances, we need not consider whether Judge Coffrin was correct in holding that 29 U.S.C. § 816 ( l ) `authorizes plaintiffs to sue ... without exhaustion of the administrative procedures set forth in the Act.' Nor, in view of our disposition of the case, need we consider whether there is a sufficient source for the statutory cause of action in 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , see Chapman v. Houston Welfare Rights Organization, 441 U.S. 600 , 99 S.Ct. 1905 , 60 L.Ed.2d 508 (1979), or elsewhere.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“... we would be less than candid not to mention that the district judge's decision on merits seems so clearly correct that we should say so at the earliest appropriate opportunity, when the public interest in resolution of the basic question is so great.”
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.