Hanauer v. Reich’s Empirical Analysis
82 F.3d 1304 · 1996
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently January 2025 · most notably Mathirampuzha v. Potter (2008), Versata Development Group, Inc. v. SAP America, Inc. (2015)
30 federal appellate · 3 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
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-Fonseca · Leedom v. Kyne · Rust v. Sullivan · Ratzlaf et Ux United States
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]cceptance of the Secretary's argument that § 8128(b) precludes district courts from considering claims that the Secretary violated a clear statutory mandate would, in the words of the Supreme Court, 'wholly deprive [claimants] of a meaningful and adequate means of vindicating [their] statutory rights.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“When the statute in question is capable of two plausible interpretations, the Secretary's decision to adopt one interpretation over the other does not constitute a violation of a clear statutory mandate.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“an implicit and narrow exception to the bar on judicial review exists for claims that the agency exceeded the scope of its delegated authority or violated a clear statutory mandate.”
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.