Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 700 F.2d 496 - Saavedra v. Donovan

Saavedra v. Donovan’s Empirical Analysis

700 F.2d 496 · 1983

Citation profile

60
cited by 60 later decisions
1
states following
June 2017
most recently cited

40 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently June 2017 · most notably Kennewick Irrigation District v. United States (1989), North Side Lumber Co. v. Block (1985)

40 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

3101983199020002010decided

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 41 U.S.C. § 351 (Service Contract) · 5 U.S.C. § 556 (Administrative Procedure Act of 1946) · 5 U.S.C. § 706

Relies on Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · United States v. Seckinger · Association of National Advertisers, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission · Penasquitos Village, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

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

  1. “Agency findings which run counter to those of the ALJ 'are given less weight than they would otherwise receive.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a court must set aside agency decisions that are 'unsupported by substantial evidence.'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The standard [of review] does not change merely because the final decision rejects the ALJ's determinations. The decision for court review is that of the agency.... The court does not review the ALJ's decision which is merely part of the record. 82 But the court must take into account the 'whole record.' Because the ALJ's factual findings are part of the record, contrary agency findings are given less weight than they would otherwise receive.”
    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.