Blake v. Califano’s Empirical Analysis
626 F.2d 891 · 1980
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 4 district ·
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Testan · Seaboard Air Line Railway Co. v. United States · Jacobs v. United States · United States v. N. Y. Rayon Importing Co. · Rush Pettway, Etc. v. American Cast Iron Pipe Company, United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Intervenor
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[b]oth interest and an inflation adjustment serve the same general end of compensating the recipient for differences in the worth of her award between the date of actual receipt and the dates as of which the money should have been paid. If one is barred the other should also be; the same considerations govern.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“long-established, deeply-imbedded principle that interest is not allowed on monetary claims against the Federal Government unless Congress (or a contract) plainly authorizes such an addition * * *.” Blake v. Califano, 626 F.2d 891, 893 (D.C. Cir. 1980). This”
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.