Crowley v. Shultz’s Empirical Analysis
704 F.2d 1269 · 1983
Citation profile
18 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently July 2002 · most notably Morgan v. Union Metal Manufacturing (1985), Gilda Marx, Inc. v. Wildwood Exercise, Inc. (1996)
18 federal appellate ·
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 5 U.S.C. § 1101 (Civil Service Miscellaneous Amendments) · 5 U.S.C. § 5596 · 5 U.S.C. § 7701
Relies on Boeing Co. v. Van Gemert · Corporation v. Raymond International Inc · Croker v. Boeing Co. · Payne v. Panama Canal Co. · Frazier v. Merit Systems Protection 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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[n]o provision of this Act shall affect any administrative proceedings pending at the time such provision takes effect. Orders shall be issued in such proceedings and appeals shall be taken therefrom as if this Act had not been enacted.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“5 in a suit filed prior to the Reform Act's effective date. Following resolution of the merits of their claims, the district court awarded the employees attorney's fees under the amended Back Pay Act. The State Department appealed the award, arguing that the Savings Clause should have been interpreted to block any fee award. The question presented was whether the district court suit constituted an”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Wilson v. Turnage“Under the overcomplement system, certain employees, while not terminated, were placed in what the appellees described ... as 'limbo'; their positions were abolished and they were not selected for promotions or other forms of advancement.... No notice was given to employees placed in overcomplement status, nor were they afforded any opportunity to challenge their disfavored status.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Wilson v. Turnage
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.