Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 670 F.3d 1096 - Pimentel v. Dreyfus

Pimentel v. Dreyfus’s Empirical Analysis

670 F.3d 1096 · 2012

Citation profile

45
cited by 45 later decisions
1
states following
May 2024
most recently cited

15 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2201 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 7 U.S.C. § 2011 (Charitable Assistance and Food Bank Act of 1987) · 7 U.S.C. § 2015 · 7 U.S.C. § 2016 · 7 U.S.C. § 2025 · 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1601 (§ 400 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996)

Relies on Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Plyler v. Doe · Graham v. Richardson

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

  1. “based [its decision] on an erroneous legal standard or a clearly erroneous finding of fact.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A careful consideration of the contours of the SNAP program, including the statutory scheme, source of funding, extent of state involvement, and history, demonstrates that SNAP is a federal program which the state merely assists in administering, rather than a state program which receives federal assistance, and that its beneficiaries are differently situated from, and cannot be compared to, [the named plaintiff].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction must establish that he is likely to succeed on the merits, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of preliminary relief, that the balance of equities tips in his favor, and that an injunction is in the public interest.”
    1 later decision 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.