Capital Legal Foundation v. Commodity Credit Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
711 F.2d 253 · 1983
Citation profile
52 federal appellate · 11 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably United States v. AVX Corp. (1992), Spann v. Colonial Village, Inc. (1990)
52 federal appellate · 11 district ·
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 Warth v. Seldin · Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc. · Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. Camp · Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization · Sierra Club v. Morton
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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“plausibly (1) allege injury in fact derived from the agency's action or inaction [and remediable by the court's order to defendant], and (2) assert that the injury is arguably within the zone of interests protected or regulated by the law on which the complaint is founded.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“standing inquiry focuses on the substance of the agency action, its adverse impact on the plaintiff, and the types of interests that the applicable law is designed to protect”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“arguably within the zone of interests to be protected or regulated by the statute or constitutional guarantee in question.”
3 later decisions 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.