Gilbert v. Derwinski’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
6 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 969 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2025 · most notably Colvin v. Derwinski (1991), Forshey v. Principi (2002)
6 federal appellate ·
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 38 U.S.C. § 301 (Department of Veterans Affairs Act)
Relies on Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · In the Matter of Samuel Winship · Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of United States Inc v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company Consumer Alert · Santosky v. Kramer
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 969 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... the Board must identify those findings it deems crucial to its decision and account for the evidence which it finds to be persuasive or unpersuasive. These decisions must contain clear analysis and succinct but complete explanations.. A bare conclusory statement, without both supporting analysis and explanation, is neither helpful to the veteran, nor ‘clear enough to permit effective judicial review’, nor in compliance with statutory requirements.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“'A finding is 'clearly erroneous' when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“if there is a 'plausible' basis in the record for the factual determinations of the BVA, even if this Court might not have reached the same factual determinations, [the Court] cannot overturn them.”
4 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.