Winter v. Interstate Commerce Commission’s Empirical Analysis
851 F.2d 1056 · 1988
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently January 2012 · most notably Town of Killingly v. Connecticut Siting Council (1991), Rosler v. Derwinski (1991)
14 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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. § 1651 · 28 U.S.C. § 2344 · 49 U.S.C. § 10102 · 5 U.S.C. § 704 · 5 U.S.C. § 706
Relies on Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Costello v. United States · Interstate Commerce Commission v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers · American Farm Lines v. Black Ball Freight Service · Lassiter v. Department of Social Services
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[N]o cases hold that the same party may simultaneously seek both judicial and administrative review. We are convinced that under the circumstances of this case Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers stands for the proposition that once the unions filed petitions to reopen and to revoke the exemption, the original [agency decision] became nonfinal.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Notwithstanding this subtitle [governing interstate commerce and permitting the Commission to reopen and reconsider its orders], an action of the Commission under this section ... is final on the date on which it is served, and a civil action to enforce, enjoin, suspend, or set aside the action may be filed after that date.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“Where a motion for rehearing is in fact filed there is no final action until the action is denied.... [W]hen the party elects to seek a rehearing there is always a possibility that the order complained of will be modified in a way which renders judicial review unnecessary. Practical considerations therefore dictate that when a petition for rehearing is filed, review may properly be deferred until this has been acted upon.”
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.