Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 894 F.2d 1107 - McCune

McCune’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
2
states following
November 2016
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently November 2016

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

80199020002010decided

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

Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Robertson v. Methow Valley Citizens Council · Phillips v. Walling US · Walling US v. General Industries Co · Connecticut Department of Income Maintenance v. Heckler

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. “(15) any employee employed on a casual basis in domestic service employment to provide babysitting services or any employee employed in domestic service employment to provide companionship services for individuals who (because of age or infirmity) are unable to care for themselves (as such terms are defíned and delimited in the regulations of the Secretary). (emphasis added).”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “be forced to forego the option of receiving these services in their homes if the cost of the services increases.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[d]usting or cleaning [the client’s bedroom or living room] appears to be routine, general household work, rather than work related to the individual. Cleaning a spill by the client in either room, by contrast, would be non-routine care more related to the individual than the general household, and would not be included in the twenty percent figure. The regulation defines care related to the individual as including meal preparation, bed making, washing of clothes and ‘other similar services.’ These similar services would presumably include other types of personal care, such as bathing, feeding, or cleaning spills.”
    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.