Suburban O'Hare Commission v. Dole’s Empirical Analysis
787 F.2d 186 · 1986
Citation profile
49 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Citizens Against Burlington, Inc. v. Busey (1991), Bieneman v. City of Chicago (1988)
49 federal appellate · 4 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
Applies 12 U.S.C. § 1848 (§ 9 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956) · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 2347 · 42 U.S.C. § 4321 (§ 2 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969) · 42 U.S.C. § 4332 (§ 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969) · 42 U.S.C. § 7401 (Air Quality Act of 1967) · 42 U.S.C. § 7409 · 42 U.S.C. § 7410
Relies on Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Camp v. Pitts · Kleppe v. Sierra Club · Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division · House v. Stynchcombe
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.
“If a decision of an administrative agency is based, in substantial part, on a statutory provision providing for exclusive review by a court of appeals, then the entire proceeding must be reviewed by a court of appeals.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“When an agency decision has two distinct bases, one of which provides for exclusive jurisdiction in the courts of appeals, the entire decision is reviewable exclusively in the appellate court.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Commty Agnst Runway v. FAA · Conoco, Inc. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Co., in No. 91-3589 v. Samuel K. Skinner, Secretary of Transportation Warren G. Leback, Maritime Administrator and the United States of America. Conoco, Inc. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours and Co., in No. 91-3920 v. Samuel K. Skinner, Secretary of Transportation Nicholas F. Brady William A. Kime, Commandant of the Coast Guard Warren G. Leback, Administrator, U.S. Department of Transportation Carol B. Hallett, Commissioner of Customs, U.S. Customs Service“[a]ny order, affirmative or negative, issued by the ... [FAA] Administrator under this chapter ... shall be subject to review by the courts of appeals of the United States or the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upon petition, filed within sixty days after the entry of such order, by any person disclosing a substantial interest in such order.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.