McIntosh’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 7 district · 2 state decisions

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

1. “[I]n our view the Supreme Court's discussion of the ministerial-duty exception in Davis establishes that the exception is too narrow to comprehend this case.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Tina Marie Sellers, by and Through Her Guardian, Natural Mother, and Next Friend, Joann Sellers Albert F. Deuser Phyllis Menke v. Robert J. Baer John J. Frank James E. Mosbacher William H. Young Mayor Vincent Schoemehl Lawrence J. King United States of America, David Vecera, National Park Ranger Edward Bridges, National Park Ranger Dennis Burnett, Chief Ranger, Tina Marie Sellers, by and Through Her Guardian, Natural Mother, and Next Friend, Joann Sellers Albert F. Deuser Phyllis Menke v. Robert J. Baer John J. Frank James E. Mosbacher William H. Young Mayor Vincent Schoemehl Lawrence J. King United States of America, David Vecera, National Park Ranger Edward Bridges, National Park Ranger Dennis Burnett, Chief Ranger, Tina Marie Sellers, by and Through Her Guardian, Natural Mother, and Next Friend, Joann Sellers Albert F. Deuser Phyllis Menke v. Robert J. Baer John J. Frank James E. Mosbacher William H. Young Mayor Vincent Schoemehl Lawrence J. King, United States of America David Vecera, National Park Ranger Edward Bridges, National Park Ranger Dennis Burnett, Chief Ranger · Sellers Sellers

2. “The administrative remedy that was available to contest the demotion in Bush , an appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board under 5 U.S.C. §§ 7512 and 7513, is not available here, because Turner's actions are not covered by this procedure.... si« * * * * * ... Turner also suggest that he may have engaged in a prohibited personnel practice actionable by the Special Counsel of MSPB under 5 U.S.C. § 1206 . However, even if we assume this to be true ... the MSPB is authorized to take disciplinary action against Turner, but not to award any affirmative relief to the injured employee. 5 U.S.C. § 1207 (b). This is not adequate to bar a Bivens action_ We conclude with the District Court that the ‘plaintiffs are without redress as to defendant Turner’s actions in the absence of a constitutional remedy’ ... and therefore that their Bivens action is not barred by Bush .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Maxey v. Kadrovach

3. “Of course, absent statutes, regulations, or some other basis for such a legitimate claim of entitlement, government employment and promotion decisions are normally not subject to procedural due-process protections. See, e.g., Colm v. Vance, 567 F.2d 1125, 1130 (D.C.Cir.1977) (Foreign Service officer had no property interest in promotion). Here, however, extensive OPM, Army, and ALMSA regulations were in effect [and] ... provided the plaintiffs with a substantial, legitimate expectation by establishing that applications for competitive placement ... were to be evaluated in accord with specified criteria and procedures. * * * We therefore hold that the plaintiffs had a property interest in ALMSA’s merit-promotion system....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 739 F. Supp. 1268 - Colburn v. Trustees of Indiana University