Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 987 F.2d 790 - Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund v. Shalala

Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund v. Shalala’s Empirical Analysis

987 F.2d 790 · 1993

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
October 2016
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 4 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2016

10 federal appellate · 4 district ·

130199320002010decided

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 Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital · Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. v. Bonjorno · Lewis v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. · Reynolds 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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “amount recognized as reasonable under this subchapter”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “give directions on actions about to be taken.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The agency's belief that Congress would resist permanently ingraining misclassified and nonallowable costs in future reimbursements to health care providers can hardly be deemed unreasonable or inconsistent with the congressional purpose of erecting a new and more accurate reimbursement methodology.”
    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.