Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 980 F.2d 1043 - Resident Council of Allen Parkway Village v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development

Resident Council of Allen Parkway Village v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development’s Empirical Analysis

980 F.2d 1043 · 1993

Citation profile

77
cited by 77 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

28 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 77 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2019 · most notably Leffall v. Dallas Independent School District (1994), United States v. Singleton (1994)

28 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

340199320002010decided

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 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Teague v. Lane · Califano v. Sanders · Cort v. Ash

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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[A]n amicus curiae generally cannot expand the scope of an appeal to implicate issues that have not been presented by the parties to the appeal.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “suffering legal wrong because of agency action, or adversely affected or aggrieved by agency action,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “(1) Is this plaintiff a member of the class for whose “especial” benefit the statute was passed? In other words, does the statute create a federal right for this plaintiff? (2) Is there any evidence of legislative intent, either explicit or implicit, to create or deny a private remedy? (3) Is it consistent with the legislative scheme to imply a private remedy? (4) Is the cause of action one traditionally relegated to state law so that implying a federal right of action would be inappropriate?”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.