Ramey v. Bowsher’s Empirical Analysis
9 F.3d 133 · 1993
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently September 2015 · most notably Murphy Exploration and Production Company, v. United States Department of the Interior and Gale A. Norton (2001), Verizon Maryland Incorporated v. Global Naps Incorporated (2004)
15 federal appellate · 2 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 28 U.S.C. § 1631 · 31 U.S.C. § 732 · 31 U.S.C. § 753 · 31 U.S.C. § 755 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 717 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 706 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 5 U.S.C. § 7702 · 5 U.S.C. § 7703
Relies on Sumner v. Mata · Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Mottley · United States v. Nordic Village, Inc. · Crawford Fitting Company v. Jt Gibbons Inc Champion International Corporation · Ruckelshaus v. Sierra Club
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]nterpreting statutes granting jurisdiction to Article III courts is exclusively the province of the courts.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“agencies can bring no particular expertise to the subject”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[A] statute which vests jurisdiction in a particular court cuts off jurisdiction in other courts in all cases covered by the 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.