Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 874 F.2d 501 - Chernin v. Lyng

Chernin v. Lyng’s Empirical Analysis

874 F.2d 501 · 1989

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
2
states following
August 2021
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently August 2021 · most notably Herman Louis Dimartini v. Lynn Jay Ferrin, Special Agent, Federal Bureau of Investigation (1989), Connelly v. Comptroller of the Currency (1989)

17 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

15019891990200020102020decided

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 21 U.S.C. § 601 (Humane Methods of Slaughter Act of 1978) · 21 U.S.C. § 671

Relies on Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth · Mathews v. Eldridge · Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill · Bishop v. Wood · Blum v. Yaretsky

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

  1. “the right to hold specific private employment and to follow a chosen profession free from unreasonable governmental interference comes within the 'liberty' and 'property' concepts of the Fifth Amendment....”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[e]mployees have an interest in their employment relations which the Fifth Amendment protects from arbitrary government interference, regardless of whether their employment relation may be dissolved at will.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “to continued employment enforceable against his employer, he does have a right enforceable in law against third parties who unlawfully interfere with the employment relation.”
    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.