Romero-Barcelo v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
643 F.2d 835 · 1981
Citation profile
43 federal appellate · 12 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 85 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2012 · most notably Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo (1982), Cool Fuel, Inc. v. Connett (1982)
43 federal appellate · 12 district · 1 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
Applies 16 U.S.C. § 1532 (§ 3 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973) · 16 U.S.C. § 1533 (§ 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973) · 16 U.S.C. § 1536 (§ 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973) · 16 U.S.C. § 1538 (§ 9 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973) · 16 U.S.C. § 470 (National Historic Lighthouse Preservation Act of 2000) · 16 U.S.C. § 470F · 16 U.S.C. § 470I · 28 U.S.C. § 1361
Relies on Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp. · United States v. Testan · Cort v. Ash
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 85 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“relatively precise standards capable of uniform application”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Each department, agency, and instrumentality of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government (1) having jurisdiction over any property or facility, or (2) engaged in any activity resulting, or which may result, in the discharge [or runoff] of air pollutants, and each officer, agent, or employee thereof, shall be subject to, and comply with, all Federal, State, interstate, and local requirements, administrative authority, and process and sanctions respecting the control and abatement of air [water] pollution in the same manner, and to the same extent as any nongovernmental entity. The preceding sentence shall apply (a) to any requirement whether substantive or procedural (including any recordkeeping or reporting requirement, any requirement respecting permits and any other requirement whatsoever), (B) to the exercise of any Federal, State or local administrative authority, and (C) to any process and sanction, whether enforced in Federal, State, or local courts or in any other manner. This subsection shall apply notwithstanding any immunity of such agencies, officers, agents, or employees under any law or rule of law. No officer, agent, or employee of the United States shall be personally liable for any civil penalty for which he is not otherwise liable.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Each [federal facility] shall be subject to, and comply with, all Federal, State, interstate, and local requirements, administrative authority, and process and sanctions respecting the control and abatement of air pollution in the same manner, and to the same extent as any non-governmental entity... The preceding sentence shall apply ... (D) to any process and sanction, whether enforced in Federal, State or local courts or in any other manner. The subsection shall apply notwithstanding any immunity of such agencies, officers, agents, or employees under any law or rule of law. No officer, agent, or employee of the United States shall be personally liable for any civil penalty for which he is not otherwise liable.”
2 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.