Yearwood v. New York City Tr. Auth.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• choosing “not to extend” the holding of a prior Sixth Circuit case comparing a Clean Air Act provision to a different but related CAA provision because the reasoning of the prior Sixth Circuit case (1) was “dubious at best,” (2
• choosing “not to extend” the holding of a prior Sixth Circuit case comparing a Clean Air Act provision to a different but related CAA provision because the reasoning of the prior Sixth Circuit case (1) was “dubious at best,” (2
• “[I]f the EPA approves a State’s proposal, then the SIP is added to the Code of Federal Regulations and becomes federal law.”
• “Sixth Circuit Rule 206(c) is unequivocal: Reported panel opinions are binding on subsequent panels. Thus, no subsequent panel overrules a published opinion of a previous panel.” (citation omitted)
• “Sixth Circuit Rule 206(c) is unequivocal: Reported panel opinions are binding on subsequent panels. Thus, no subsequent panel overrules a published opinion of a previous panel.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).