Ramey v. Gober’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate ·

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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(e) Factors for Consideration. Factors to be considered in determining whether a veteran’s disease resulted from exposure to ionizing radiation in service include: (1) The probable dose, in terms of dose type, rate, and duration as a factor in inducing the disease, taking into account any known limitations in the dosimetry devices employed in its measurement or the methodologies employed in its estimation; (2) The relative sensitivity of the involved tissue to induction, by ionizing radiation, of the specific pathology; (3) The veteran’s gender and pertinent family history; (4) The veteran’s age at time of exposure; (5) The time-lapse between exposure and onset of the disease; and (6) The extent to which exposure to radiation, or other carcinogens, outside of service may have contributed to the development of the disease.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 12 Vet. App. 145 - Hilkert v. West

2. “Section 3.311, which the agency promulgated following the enactment of the Radiation Compensation Act, establishes a procedure for dealing with claims brought by radiation-exposed veterans or their survivors. When it is determined that a veteran was exposed to ionizing radiation during service and developed a radiogenic disease within a specified period after exposure, the regulation provides that the claim will be referred to the DVA’s Under Secretary for Benefits. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.311 ( b)(l).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 11 Vet. App. 200 - Wandel v. West