Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 960 F.2d 1515 - Holy Cross Wilderness Fund v. Madigan

Holy Cross Wilderness Fund v. Madigan’s Empirical Analysis

960 F.2d 1515 · 1992

Citation profile

67
cited by 67 later decisions
September 2017
most recently cited

28 federal appellate · 25 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 67 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably Sierra Club v. Slater (1997), Utahns for Better Transportation v. United States Department of Transportation (2002)

28 federal appellate · 25 district ·

340199220002010decided

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 Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Heckler v. Chaney · Marsh v. Oregon Natural Resources Council · Robertson v. Methow Valley Citizens Council · Kleppe 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 67 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “at the environmental consequences of proposed actions. Robertson, 490 U.S. at 350 , 109 S.Ct. at 1846 ; Kleppe v. Sierra Club, 427 U.S. 390 , 410 n. 21, 96 S.Ct. 2718, 2730, n. 21 , 49 L.Ed.2d 576 (1976); Park County Resource Council, Inc. v. United States Dept. of Agric., 817 F.2d 609 , 620 (10th Cir.1987); Johnston v. Davis, 698 F.2d 1088, 1091 (10th Cir.1983). It is”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(i) the environmental impact of the proposed action, (ii) any adverse environmental effects which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented, (iii) alternatives to the proposed action, (iv) the relationship between local short-term uses of man’s environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity, and (v) any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources which would be involved in the proposed action should it be implemented.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “It ensures that the agency, in reaching its decision, will have available, and will carefully consider, detailed information concerning significant environmental impacts; it also guarantees that the relevant information will be made available to the larger audience that may also play a role in both the decision maMng process and the implementation of that decision.”
    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.