Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 814 F.2d 308 - Maczko v. Joyce

Maczko v. Joyce’s Empirical Analysis

814 F.2d 308 · 1987

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
February 2011
most recently cited

9 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently February 2011

9 federal appellate ·

1001987199020002010decided

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. § 1361 · 28 U.S.C. § 1651 · 29 U.S.C. § 701 (Employment Opportunities for Individuals With Disabilities Act) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on Allied Chemical Corporation v. Daiflon Inc · Rice v. Norman Williams Co. · Chernabaeff v. Moss · Oyler v. Adams · Sigmon Fuel Company v. Tennessee Valley Authority

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

  1. “mandatory or ministerial obligation. If the alleged duty is discretionary or directory, the duty is not 'owed.' " Short v. Murphy, 512 F.2d 374 , 377 (6th Cir.1975). A duty is not "owed”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The existence of jurisdiction under section 1361 is inextricably bound with the merits of whether a writ of mandamus should [be] issue[d]....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions....”
    1 later decision 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.