Petrini v. Howard’s Empirical Analysis
918 F.2d 1482 · 1990
Citation profile
49 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently April 2014 · most notably Richison v. Ernest Group, Inc. (2011), Lyons v. Jefferson Bank & Trust (1993)
49 federal appellate · 3 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 5 U.S.C. § 1206 · 5 U.S.C. § 2302
Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Mitchell v. Forsyth · Bush v. Lucas · Nixon v. Fitzgerald · Schweiker v. Chilicky
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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the issues involved are questions of law, the proper resolution of which are beyond reasonable doubt, and the failure to address the issues would result in a miscarriage of justice.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“beyond dispute that the CSRA was intended to provide the exclusive procedure for challenging federal personnel decisions.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Brett L. Arron v. United States of America, Brett L. Arron v. United States of America Department of Health and Human Services Public Health Service Indian Health Services Navajo Indian Health Service Donna E. Shalala, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services Timothy Fleming Douglas Peter Gary Escudero John Hubbard, National Health Service Corps Donald L. Weaver, Director of National Health Service Corps and Myriam Curet · Nguyen v. United States Department of Defense J“codifies the doctrine of absolute immunity and forces persons injured by common law torts committed by federal employees within the scope of their employment to seek redress against the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act[.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Salmon v. Schwarz
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.