Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 682 F.2d 925 - Sam v. United States

Sam v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

682 F.2d 925 · 1982

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
4
states following
May 2011
most recently cited

1 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently May 2011

1 district · 4 state decisions

901982199020002010decided

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. § 1406 · 5 U.S.C. § 5301 (Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990) · 5 U.S.C. § 5331 · 5 U.S.C. § 5332 (Federal Salary Act of 1967) · 5 U.S.C. § 5333 · 5 U.S.C. § 5334 · 5 U.S.C. § 5343 (Prevailing Rate Equalization Adjustment Act of 1972) · 5 U.S.C. § 5941

Relies on Udall v. Tallman · United States v. Testan · Dandridge v. Williams · McGowan v. State of Maryland Gallagher · Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc.

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

  1. “Ordinarily, if a new regulation or interpretation merely recites settled prior law or policy, then retroactive application of the regulation or interpretation is proper. If, however, the new regulation or interpretation overrules prior law or policy, the new regulation or interpretation will not, depending upon various factors, be given retroactive effect. This distinction is obviously grounded upon notions of fairness to the involved parties. Citing, Anderson, Clayton & Co. v. United States, 562 F.2d 972 (5th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 436 U.S. 944 [ 98 S.Ct. 2845 , 56 L.Ed.2d 785 ] (1978).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “controlling weight unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation.”
    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.