196 W. Va. 442 - In Re Queen’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably 212 W. Va. 149 - Webb v. West Virginia Board of Medicine (2002), 199 W. Va. 196 - Conley v. Workers' Compensation Division (1997)
46 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
Relies on Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · Marsh v. Oregon Natural Resources Council · Arkansas v. Oklahoma · 195 W. Va. 297 - Martin v. Randolph County Board of Education · 182 W. Va. 289 - Randolph County Board of Education v. Scalia
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An appellate court may reverse a decision of the Correctional Officers’ Civil Service Commission as clearly wrong or arbitrary or capricious only if the Commission used a misapplication of the law, entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem, offered an explanation that ran counter to the evidence before the Commission, or offered one that was so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the product of Commission expertise.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“standards of review are deferential ones which presume an agency's actions are valid as long as the decision is supported by substantial evidence or by a rational basis.' Syllabus Point 3, In re Queen, 196 W.Va. 442 , 473 S.E.2d 483 (1996).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“An adjudicative decision of the Correctional Officers’ Civil Service Commission should not be overturned by an appellate court unless it was clearly erroneous, arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with the law. Review under this standard is narrow and the reviewing court looks to the Civil Service Commission’s action to determine whether the record reveals that a substantial and rational basis exists for its decision.”
2 later decisions 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.