Yaretsky v. Blum’s Empirical Analysis
629 F.2d 817 · 1980
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2014 · most notably Blum v. Yaretsky (1982), State ex rel. Ormet Corp. v. Industrial Commission (1990)
13 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
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.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Relies on Mathews v. Eldridge · Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co. · Vitek v. Jones · United States v. Morgan
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““According to the opinion in the leading first Morgan case, the requirement is not that deciding officers must personally read the record but it is that they must personally ‘consider and appraise’ the evidence. The Court declared: ‘Evidence may be taken by an examiner. Evidence thus taken may be sifted and analyzed by competent subordinates.’ Since the only purpose of sifting and analyzing of evidence by subordinates is to save the time of the deciding officers, this necessarily means that deciding officers may ‘consider and appraise’ the evidence by reading a summary or analysis prepared by subordinates. The Supreme Court thus did not require in the First Morgan case that deciding officers must read all the evidence or even that they must directly read any of it. The requirement has to do with personal understanding of the evidence, not with the mechanics by which the understanding is developed. In common practice, deciding officers develop their understanding of evidence not only through reports of subordinates but especially through summaries and explanations and briefs and oral arguments of parties.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“administrative decision-maker in an appeal from a hearing officer recommendation to read (or listen to) the entire transcript (or tape recording) of the hearing before issuing an administratively final decision.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“the life of this aspect of Morgan I was extremely brief. In Morgan IV (United States v. Morgan, 313 U.S. 409 , 61 S.Ct. 999, 85 L.Ed. 1429 (1941)) Mr. Justice Frankfurter, writing for a Court unanimous on this point, took back most or all of what the first decision had given.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Keeler v. Joy
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.