Lamb v. Principi’s Empirical Analysis
284 F.3d 1378 · 2002
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 93 later decisions — most recently March 2022 · most notably Beasley v. Shinseki (2013), State v. Manck (2005)
3 federal appellate · 1 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 Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill · Goldberg v. Kelly · Kerr v. United States Dist. Court for Northern Dist. of Cal. · Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. Holland · Ex parte Fahey
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 93 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'[E]xtraordinary writs cannot be used as substitutes for appeals, even though hardship may result from delay and perhaps unnecessary trial.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“may not review (A) a challenge to a factual determination, or (B) a challenge to a law or regulation as applied to the facts of a particular case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Martin v. O'Rourke“a `clear and indisputable right' to the writ and ... that [there is] no alternative way to obtain the relief sought.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.