Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 889 F.2d 1472 - National Hand Tool Corp. v. Pasquarell

National Hand Tool Corp. v. Pasquarell’s Empirical Analysis

889 F.2d 1472 · 1989

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
June 2022
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently June 2022

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

9019891990200020102020decided

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. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))

Relies on United States v. Garner · Sussex Engineering, Ltd. v. Montgomery · City of Austin, Texas, Bracken-Ridge Hospital v. Heckler · Valdez-Gaona v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

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

  1. “A denial by [the USCIS] of an application for a visa may be reversed only if the decision was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It is well settled that the applicant for a visa bears the burden of establishing eligibility.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “entitled to considerable deference in its interpretation of the governing statute.”
    2 later decisions 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.