Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 956 F.2d 330 - Bayer v. United States Department of the Treasury

Bayer v. United States Department of the Treasury’s Empirical Analysis

956 F.2d 330 · 1992

Citation profile

170
cited by 170 later decisions
2
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

29 federal appellate · 118 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 170 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably Greene v. Dalton (1999), Bowden v. United States (1997)

29 federal appellate · 118 district · 3 state decisions

960199220002010decided

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

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc. · Brown v. General Services Administration · Mann v. Koob · Constant 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 170 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “when the complainant shows that he/she was not notified of the time limits and was not otherwise aware of them....”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “plead[ ] and prov[e] ... 'equitable reasons' for noncompliance”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “An ... agency may accept the [EEOC] complaint for processing in accordance with this subpart only if: (i) The complainant brought to the attention of the Equal Employment Opportunity Counselor the matter causing him/her to believe he/she had been discriminated against within 30 calendar days of the date of the alleged discriminatory event, the effective date of an alleged discriminatory personnel action, or the date that the aggrieved person knew or reasonably should have known of the discriminatory event or personnel action ...”
    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.