Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 729 F.2d 801 - Cinciarelli v. Reagan

Cinciarelli v. Reagan’s Empirical Analysis

729 F.2d 801 · 1984

Citation profile

131
cited by 131 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

62 federal appellate · 20 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 131 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2019 · most notably Commissioner, Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Jean (1990), Federal Election Commission v. Rose (1986)

62 federal appellate · 20 district · 3 state decisions

8501984199020002010decided

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 10 U.S.C. § 679 · 10 U.S.C. § 680 · 28 U.S.C. § 2412 · 28 U.S.C. § 294 · 42 U.S.C. § 1988 · 42 U.S.C. § 7607

Relies on Federal Crop Ins Corporation v. Merrill · F. D. Rich Co. v. United States Ex Rel. Industrial Lumber Co. · Spencer v. National Labor Relations Board · Action on Smoking & Health v. Civil Aeronautics Board · Broad Avenue Laundry & Tailoring v. United States

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

  1. “[A] court shall award to a prevailing party other than the United States fees and other expenses ... incurred by that party in any civil action (other than cases sounding in tort) brought by or against the United States in any court' having jurisdiction of that action, unless the court finds that the position of the United States was substantially justified or that special circumstances make an award unjust.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a per se rule that the government pays fees for EAJA litigation whenever it defends an EAJA suit on the basis that its position in the action on the merits was substantially justified and loses.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “the burden is on the government to show that its litigation position was substantially justified on the law and the facts.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.