Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 724 F.2d 259 - Cutting v. Muzzey

Cutting v. Muzzey’s Empirical Analysis

724 F.2d 259 · 1984

Citation profile

87
cited by 87 later decisions
5
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

35 federal appellate · 15 district · 9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 87 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Romero-Barcelo v. Hernandez-Agosto (1996), Smith v. Lomax (1995)

35 federal appellate · 15 district · 9 state decisions

5301984199020002010decided

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 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Harlow v. Fitzgerald · Butz v. Economou · Great American Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Novotny · Lake Country Estates, Inc. v. Tahoe Regional Planning Agency · Sullivan v. Little Hunting Park, 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 87 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “generalizations concerning a policy or state of affairs,”
    20 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It is not the enactment of an overall plan or the establishment of general policy, both of which could be said to be legislative in nature. . . . In our case the Planning Board merely decided to insist on completion of a particular road before granting approval of a specified proposed subdivision.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the routine exercise of administrative discretion ..., an exercise untrammeled by any requirements as to a hearing, precise standards, a record of evidence, and substantial evidence review”
    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.