Hayes v. Harvey’s Empirical Analysis
903 F.3d 32 · 2018
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 12 U.S.C. § 1715Z · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 42 U.S.C. § 1437F
Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · United States v. Mead Corp. · Christensen v. Harris County · Stone 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“not warrant deference under Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. , 467 U.S. 837 , 104 S.Ct. 2778 , 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984) ; [they are], however, entitled to a degree of 'respect' under Skidmore v. Swift & Co. , 323 U.S. 134 , 65 S.Ct. 161 , 89 L.Ed. 124 (1944).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“based on the thoroughness evident in its consideration, the validity of its reasoning, its consistency with earlier and later pronouncements, and all those factors which give it power to persuade.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“When Congress amends legislation, courts must presume it intends [the change] to have real and substantial effect.”
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.