169 W. Va. 162 - Harrison v. Ginsberg’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently June 2012 · most notably 172 W. Va. 17 - Hodge v. Ginsberg (1983), 178 W. Va. 792 - St. Mary's Hospital v. State Health Planning & Development Agency (1987)
27 state decisions
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 42 U.S.C. § 601 (§ 401 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe · Bowman Transportation, Inc. v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc. · King v. Smith · Shea v. Vialpando · 160 W. Va. 248 - North v. West Virginia Board of Regents
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Originally the writ of certiorari existed as a limited remedy and served primarily as a means of reviewing the actions of inferior tribunals to determine if they had exceeded their jurisdiction. In 1882, however, the Legislature substantially broadened the application of the writ, and the extent of review it affords, with the enactment of the language we now find in W. Va.Code § 53-3-3.... Although this statutory language caused some confusion in the early years after its enactment, it was generally recognized that the statute substantially expanded the scope of review of the circuit court, giving it the power to rehear the issues on the evidence certified from the inferior tribunal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Our decision in Citizens Bank was premised upon the design of administrative law to guarantee the rationality of the process through which results are determined, and upon the necessity of a record for appellate review. Although Citizens Bank dealt with a decision under the Administrative Procedure Act, from which the Department of Welfare is excluded, see State ex rel. Ginsberg v. Watt, supra[, 168 W.Va. 503 , 285 S.E.2d 367 ] we recently indicated in Monongahela Power Company v. Public Service Commission, W. Va.[, 166 W.Va. 423 ], 276 S.E.2d 179 (1981), that the principles of Citizens Bank are clearly applicable to any administrative review. 276 S.E.2d at 182 n. 4.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Our function as a reviewing court is to review the record to determine if the evidence adduced below supports the findings of the inferior tribunal, and whether the tribunal’s conclusions follow from those findings. However, if the record of the proceedings below does not reveal those facts which were determinative of the ruling or the logic behind the ruling, we are powerless to review the lower tribunal’s action.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.