Statute treatment: 16 U.S.C. § 1853

Ranked leading cases interpreting this statute, drawn from 484 citation events across 163 distinct cases.

484citations total

163distinct interpreting cases

34distinct courts

97citations in last 5y

1977–2026year range

Top 20 leading cases

#1 North Carolina Fisheries Ass'n, Inc. v. Gutierrez (2007) dcd 86 own cites 7× in case

#2 Oceana, Inc. v. Pritzker (2014) dcd 15 own cites 15× in case

#3 Oceana, Inc. v. Wilbur Ross (2019) cadc 73 own cites 6× in case

#4 Paul Conti and Conti Corporation (As Owner of F/v Providenza) v. United States (2002) cafc 164 own cites 4× in case

#5 National Coalition for Marine Conservation v. Evans (2002) dcd 20 own cites 11× in case

#6 Flaherty v. Bryson (2012) dcd 36 own cites 7× in case

#7 Oceana, Inc. v. Evans (2005) dcd 36 own cites 6× in case

#8 Guindon v. Pritzker (2014) dcd 24 own cites 7× in case

#9 Loper Bright Enterprises, Inc v. Gina Raimondo (2022) cadc 13 own cites 10× in case

#10 Tempest Fisheries v. Locke (2012) ca1 33 own cites 5× in case

#11 Oceana, Inc. v. Locke (2011) dcd 40 own cites 4× in case

#12 A.M.L. International, Inc. v. Daley (2000) mad 15 own cites 7× in case

#13 Conservation Law Foundation v. Evans (2001) dcd 24 own cites 5× in case

#14 Conservation Law v. U.S. Dept of Commer (2004) ca1 59 own cites 3× in case

#15 Washington Trollers Association v. Juanita Kreps, Secretary of Commerce (1981) ca9 13 own cites 7× in case

#16 Hawaii Longline Association v. National Marine Fisheries Serv. (2003) dcd 13 own cites 7× in case

#17 Conti v. United States (2001) uscfc 11 own cites 7× in case

#18 Oceana, Inc. v. Locke (2010) dcd 7 own cites 9× in case

#19 Oceana, Inc. v. Pritzker (2014) dcd 11 own cites 6× in case

#20 Conservation Law Foundation v. Pritzker (2014) dcd 11 own cites 6× in case

Ranking method: leading_score = ln(1 + own_citation_count) × √(mentions_in_case) × flag_factor, where flag_factor = 1.0 green · 0.6 unknown · 0.5 neutral · 0.4 yellow · 0.3 procedural · 0 red. Red-flagged cases excluded — their interpretation has been undermined and shouldn't lead the list. Top 20 returned per statute. Open any case for full G Cite, trajectory, and per-circuit treatment.