Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 864 F.2d 868 - Hall v. McLaughlin

Hall v. McLaughlin’s Empirical Analysis

864 F.2d 868 · 1989

Citation profile

71
cited by 71 later decisions
February 2021
most recently cited

45 federal appellate · 5 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 71 later decisions — most recently February 2021 · most notably Checkosky v. Securities & Exchange Commission (1994), Cross-Sound Ferry Services, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Commission (1991)

45 federal appellate · 5 district ·

35019891990200020102020decided

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 5 U.S.C. § 706 · 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (§ 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1152 (§ 202 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1153 (§ 203 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of United States Inc v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company Consumer Alert · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation Same · Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation · Greater Boston Television Corporation v. Federal Communications Commission, Whdh, Inc., a Massachusettscorporation, Intervenor. Whdh, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Greater Boston Televisioncorporation, a Massachusetts Corporation, Intervenor. Charles River Civic Television, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Whdh, Inc., Boston Broadcastersinc., Intervenors. Whdh, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Boston Broadcasters, Inc., Intervenor. Greater Boston Tv Co., Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Whdh, Inc., Boston Broadcastersinc., Intervenors

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 71 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Divergence from agency precedent demands an explanation.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Where the reviewing court can ascertain that the agency has not in fact diverged from past decisions, the need for a comprehensive and explicit statement of its current rationale is less pressing.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[W]here a particular agency action does not appear to be inconsistent with prior decisions, the agency's explanation need not be elaborate.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.