Goldstein v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
9 F.3d 521 · 1993
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably TRM, Inc. v. United States (1995), Ghattas v. United States (1994)
9 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
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 7 U.S.C. § 2021 · 7 U.S.C. § 2023
Relies on Cole v. United States · Butz v. Glover Livestock Commission Co. · Hines v. Consolidated Rail Corp. · Kulkin v. Bergland · Martin v. United States
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“acted within its authority in permanently disqualifying [plaintiff] from the food stamp program.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the first occasion or any subsequent occasion of a disqualification based on the purchase of coupons or trafficking in coupons or authorization cards by a retail food store or wholesale food concern, except that the Secretary shall have the discretion to impose a civil money penalty of up to $20,000 for each violation ... in lieu of disqualification under this subparagraph, for such purchase of coupons or trafficking in coupons or cards that constitutes a violation of the provisions of this chapter or the regulations issued pursuant to this chapter, if the Secretary determines that there is substantial evidence (including emdence that neither the ownership nor management of the store or food concern was aware of, approved, benefited from, or was involved in the conduct or approval of the violation) that such store or food concern had an effective policy and program in effect to prevent violations of the chapter and the regulations [.]”
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.