Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 672 F.2d 935 - Jolly v. Listerman

Jolly v. Listerman’s Empirical Analysis

672 F.2d 935 · 1982

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
August 2018
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 6 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably Sonya G. Stewart, v. Donald L. Evans, in His Official Capacity As Secretary of Commerce, et al. (2002), Frizelle v. Slater (1997)

11 federal appellate · 6 district ·

1501982199020002010decided

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

Relies on Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Pickering v. Board of Education of Township High School District 205 Will County Illinois · Perry v. Sindermann

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

  1. “intended to be something less than a binding rule.... [Its] impact ... is clearly informative, perhaps precatory, but certainly not directive or mandatory.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The use of the word 'should' ... detracts significantly from any claim that this guideline is more than merely precatory.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “provide for an attempt to place an employee in a more suitable position if his or her performance is unsatisfactory;”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.