Ortiz v. Eichler’s Empirical Analysis
794 F.2d 889 · 1986
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 8 district · 14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably Bennett v. White (1989), United States v. Kosma (1991)
11 federal appellate · 8 district · 14 state decisions
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 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Mathews v. Eldridge · Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Goldberg v. Kelly · Ohio v. Roberts · Ingraham v. Wright
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“At a minimum, due process requires the agency to explain, in terms comprehensible to the claimant, exactly what the agency proposes to do and why the agency is taking this action. If [the state] finds that a claimant has not performed some action that the regulations require, the notice must explain what the claimant was required to do and how his or her actions failed to meet this standard.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Although [the federal] regulations do not specify precisely the information required for adequate notice, the district court properly looked to requirements mandated by the due process clause to flesh out the details.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[Proper] notice is necessary to protect claimants against proposed agency action 'resting on incorrect or misleading factual premises or on misapplication of rules or an policies to the facts of particular cases.'”
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.