Gardels v. Central Intelligence Agency’s Empirical Analysis
637 F.2d 770 · 1980
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 35 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably Burke v. Gould (2002), Afshar v. Department of State (1983)
30 federal appellate · 35 district ·
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.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 5 U.S.C. § 552 (Freedom of Information Act) · 50 U.S.C. § 403 (§ 102 of the National Security Act of 1947)
Relies on Vaughn v. Rosen · Jones v. Nor-Tex Agencies, Inc. · Time, Inc. v. Bon Air Hotel, Inc. · Phillippi v. Central Intelligence Agency · Founding Church of Scientology of Washington, D. C., Inc. v. National Security Agency
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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he procedure contemplated by the [local] rule ... isolates the facts that the parties assert are material, distinguishes disputed from undisputed facts, and identifies the pertinent parts of the record.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a]n opposition to such a motion shall be accompanied by a separate concise statement of genuine issues setting forth all material facts as to which it is contended there exists a genuine issue necessary to be litigated, which shall include references to the parts of the record relied on to support the statement.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“fail[ed] ... to specify the material facts upon which [the CIA] relie[d] and merely incorporate[d] entire affidavits and other materials without reference to the particular facts recited therein ....”
3 later decisions 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.