Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 631 F.3d 136 - Cody v. Caterisano

Cody v. Caterisano’s Empirical Analysis

631 F.3d 136 · 2011

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
April 2022
most recently cited

4 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 10 U.S.C. § 101 (Acquisition Improvement and Accountability Act of 2007) · 10 U.S.C. § 6957 · 10 U.S.C. § 6959 · 10 U.S.C. § 971 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 2412 · 8 U.S.C. § 1440 (§ 329 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1447 (§ 336 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · Pierce v. Underwood · Commissioner, Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Jean · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Pangilinan · Berenyi v. District Director, Immigration & Naturalization Service

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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In doing so, it is appropriate to consider the reasonable overall objectives of the [G]overnment and the extent to which the alleged governmental misconduct departed from them.... Although an unreasonable stance taken on a single issue may ... undermine the substantial justification of the [G]overnment’s position, that question can be answered only by looking to the stance’s effect on the entire civil action. [Thus,] while a party may become a “prevailing party” on a single substantive issue ..., it does not automatically follow that the [G]overnment’s position in the case as a whole is not substantially justified.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[B]oth the [EAJA] order and the record reflect that the district court considered the arguments of both parties to be reasonable. We agree. In this case of first impression, the Government made reasonable arguments based on statutory interpretation and analogous cases.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[A] position can be justified even though it is not correct, and . . . it can be substantially (i.e., for the most part) justified if a reasonable person could think it correct, that is, if it has a reasonable basis in law and fact.”
    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.