Phillips v. McLaughlin’s Empirical Analysis
854 F.2d 673 · 1988
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently September 2018
2 federal appellate ·
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 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1184 (§ 214 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1186
Relies on Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of United States Inc v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company Consumer Alert · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · United States v. Munsingwear, Inc. · Southern Pacific Terminal Company v. Interstate Commerce Commission · Moore v. Ogilvie
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The parties’ arguments concerning the need to conserve judicial resources have superficial appeal but may not be adopted. While it is regrettable that if plaintiffs were to present a legal challenge to the [new] regulation as implemented, the parties might be required to expend resources litigating anew [the agency’s interpretation of the old regulation], the Constitution does not permit us to classify an opinion as nonadvisory by anticipating a challenge to the new ... regulation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A request for prospective relief alone, founded on a challenge to a regulation which no longer applies to plaintiffs, does not present an actual case or controversy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Michael T. v. Crouch“In the federal system an appellate court determines mootness as of the time it considers the case, not as of the time that it was filed”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Jones v. Poindexter
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.