Cronin v. Browner’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently March 2019
4 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 15 U.S.C. § 78A (§ 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 1381 (§ 4201 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1451 (§ 4301 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 33 U.S.C. § 1251 (Alternative Water Sources Act of 2000) · 33 U.S.C. § 1311 · 33 U.S.C. § 1316
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Bell v. Hood · Hagans v. Lavine · Duke Power Co. v. Carolina Environmental Study Group, Inc. · Bender v. Williamsport Area School District
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“will not decide the substance of a proposed regulation until all information-gathering has been completed and all information (including public comments) has been fully and fairly considered____The consent decree permits EPA to determine that, based upon public comment and further reflection, the proposed regulation should be modified, or should not be issued at all. Proposed Intervenors raise the pure conjecture that [the consent decree], ... might someday be interpreted to require EPA to in fact issue regulations.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“where, as here, [UWAG] ... can offer no evidence that (1) [its] views will not be taken into account in the administrative process ...; (2) [its] interests will be prejudiced as a result of the timetable ... contained in the Consent Decree; or (3) EPA is under any obligation imposed by the proposed Consent Decree to issue certain substantive regulations, or any regula tions at all, there is simply no basis for concluding that intervention is warranted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A non-discretionary or mandatory duty arises only where an agency bears a duty to act by a date certain.”
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.