Cutler v. Hayes’s Empirical Analysis
818 F.2d 879 · 1987
Citation profile
53 federal appellate · 37 district · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 153 later decisions — most recently January 2021 · most notably RecoverEdge L.P. v. Pentecost (1995), Sierra Club v. Thomas (1987)
53 federal appellate · 37 district · 16 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 21 U.S.C. § 321 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 355 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 376 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 5 U.S.C. § 555 (Administrative Procedure Act of 1946) · 5 U.S.C. § 702 · 5 U.S.C. § 706
Relies on Warth v. Seldin · Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc. · Allen v. Wright · Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization
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 153 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[d]elays that might be altogether reasonable in the sphere of economic regulation are less tolerable when human lives are at stake.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Agency action taken under sections silent in this respect is directly reviewable in a district court under some appropriate head of its jurisdiction, for courts of appeals have only such jurisdiction as Congress has chosen to confer upon them.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“contains no single, overarching provision governing judicial review. Instead, discrete agency actions are subject to specialized review provisions. See, e.g., ... § 371(f) (review by court of appeals of orders issued pursuant to provisions enumerated in § 371(e)).[ 4 ] Agency actions taken under sections silent in this respect are directly reviewable in a district court under some appropriate head of its jurisdiction, for courts of appeals have only such jurisdiction as Congress has chosen to confer upon them.”
4 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.