Davis v. McDonald’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1651 · 38 U.S.C. § 511 · 38 U.S.C. § 7292
Relies on Kerr v. United States Dist. Court for Northern Dist. of Cal. · Cheney v. United States District Court for District of Columbia · Helfer v. West · Conway v. Principi · Lamb v. Principi
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This court has jurisdiction to review the [Veterans Court’s] decision whether to grant a mandamus petition that raises a non-frivolous legal question.... We may not review the factual merits of the veteran’s claim, but we may determine whether the petitioner has satisfied the legal standard for issuing the writ. In conducting such a review, we do not interfere with the [Veterans Court’s] role as the final appellate arbiter of the facts underlying a veteran’s claim or the application of veterans’ benefits law to the particular facts of a veteran’s case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Williams v. McDonald“When delay is alleged as the basis for a petition, this Court has held that a clear and indisputable right to the writ does not exist unless the petitioner demonstrates that the alleged delay is so extraordinary, given the demands on and resources of the Secretary, that it is equivalent to an arbitrary refusal by the Secretary to act.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Martin v. O'Rourke
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.