Joelson v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
86 F.3d 1413 · 1996
Citation profile
27 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently July 2017 · most notably Jackson v. City of Columbus (1999), Arthur Cutshall v. Don Sundquist, Govenor of the State of Tennessee (1999)
27 federal appellate · 4 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 11 U.S.C. § 321 · 11 U.S.C. § 324 · 11 U.S.C. § 341 · 11 U.S.C. § 701 · 11 U.S.C. § 702 · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2675 · 28 U.S.C. § 581 (§ 224 of the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 (Title 11))
Relies on Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Allen v. Wright
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 75 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We review a district court's decision to grant a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction de novo.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““the question is whether the Secretary ... enjoys absolute discretion — whether such a decision is totally committed to the judgment of the agency because of the practical requirements of the task to be performed, absence of available standards against which to measure the administrative action, or even the fact that no useful purpose could be served by judicial review.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Appointment to the trustee panel meant only that [the plaintiff] was eligible and available to serve as a trustee, and did not grant him an affirmative right to continued membership on the panel.”
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.