Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 725 F.2d 958 - Motor Coach Industries, Inc. v. Dole

Motor Coach Industries, Inc. v. Dole’s Empirical Analysis

725 F.2d 958 · 1984

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
3
states following
January 2014
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently January 2014 · most notably Scheduled Airlines Traffic Offices, Inc. v. Department of Defense (1996), Chemung County v. Dole (1986)

18 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

1401984199020002010decided

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 31 U.S.C. § 3302 · 31 U.S.C. § 9701 (Treasury Forfeiture Fund Act of 1992) · 41 U.S.C. § 252 (Small Business Emergency Relief Act) · 41 U.S.C. § 254 · 41 U.S.C. § 260 · 41 U.S.C. § 5 · 5 U.S.C. § 702

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 · Flast v. Cohen · Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization

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

  1. “(1) the party seeking relief must allege an actual injury within the zone of interests protected by the statute; (2) the injury must be fairly traceable to the specific agency action challenged; and (3) the alleged injury must be such that it likely would be redressed by a favorable decision.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The documents governing the Trust not only made the FAA the sole beneficiary, but gave the agency a prominent, if not exclusive, role in the Trust's administration. The FAA established the airlines' contribution formula, monitored collections with its own staff, exercised final approval power over disbursements, and participated in every phase of the decision to award Eagle the bus contract.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “While those seeking Government contracts have no right to the award of a contract, they do have a right to reasonable treatment of their bids.... This right derives from the combination of the statutory scheme regulating [the agency’s] procurement ... and the review provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 702 .”
    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.