Buckley v. West’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 38 U.S.C. § 1110 · 38 U.S.C. § 5101 · 38 U.S.C. § 5107 · 38 U.S.C. § 7104 · 38 U.S.C. § 7105 · 38 U.S.C. § 7251 · 38 U.S.C. § 7252 · 38 U.S.C. § 7261
Relies on Christianson v. Colt Industries Operating Corp. · Gilbert v. Derwinski · Epps v. West · Fletcher v. Derwinski · Murphy v. Derwinski
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Ledford and Collaro support the proposition that this Court has jurisdiction over claims that an appellant has reasonably raised to the RO and that the BVA has failed properly to adjudicate, and that the Court may entertain any arguments made in support of such claims when presented with a 'vague' or general NOD or, at least, one that does not limit the Court's consideration of the arguments made.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hayre v. Principi“[a] written communication from a claimant or his or her representative expressing dissatisfaction or disagreement with an adjudicative determination by the [RO] and a desire to contest the result”; it “must be in terms which can be reasonably construed as [expressing] disagreement with that determination and a desire for appellate review”). .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“appropriately identified [from] the radix of his [NOD].”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hayre v. Principi
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.