Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 785 F.2d 556 - Bowling v. Block

Bowling v. Block’s Empirical Analysis

785 F.2d 556 · 1986

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
6
states following
October 2006
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 7 district · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently October 2006 · most notably 227 Cal. App. 3d 318 - Sierra-Bay Federal Land Bank Ass'n v. Superior Court (1991), Harper v. Federal Land Bank of Spokane (1989)

11 federal appellate · 7 district · 10 state decisions

220198619902000decided

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 12 U.S.C. § 2001 · 15 U.S.C. § 1601 (§ 102 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 5 U.S.C. § 701

Relies on Cort v. Ash · Touche Ross & Co. v. Redington · California v. Sierra Club · Smith v. Russellville Production Credit Ass'n

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

  1. ““In determining whether a private remedy is implicit in a statute not expressly providing one, several factors are relevant. First, is the plaintiff ‘one of the class for whose especial benefit the statute was enacted/ ... (emphasis supplied) — that is, does the statute create a federal right in favor of the plaintiff? Second, is there any indication of legislative intent, explicit or implicit, either to create such a remedy or to deny one? ... Third, is it consistent with the underlying purposes of the legislative scheme to imply such a remedy for the plaintiff? ... And finally, is the cause of action one traditionally relegated to state law, in an area basically the concern of the States, so that it would be inappropriate to infer a cause of action based solely on federal law?” [Citations omitted.]”
    2 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.