Combee v. Principi’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

cited by 21 later decisions

February 1999

most recently cited

1 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 38 U.S.C. § 1110 · 38 U.S.C. § 1112 · 38 U.S.C. § 1131 · 38 U.S.C. § 1154 · 38 U.S.C. § 312 · 38 U.S.C. § 501 · 38 U.S.C. § 5107 · 38 U.S.C. § 7261

Relies on United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Udall v. Tallman · Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Milhollin · Federal Election Commission v. Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee · Martin v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Commission

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

“Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. Presumptive periods are not intended to limit service connection to diseases so diagnosed when the evidence warrants direct service connection. The presumptive provisions of the statute and Department of Veterans Affairs regulations implementing them are intended as liberalizations applicable when the evidence would not warrant service connection without their aid.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Combee v. Brown · Combee v. Brown
“[t]he VA’s interpretation that the list of radiogenic diseases is exclusive, i.e., that a veteran can only establish service connection on a direct basis based on radiation exposure if the disability is enumerated in that list, is reasonable in light of the expressed goals of both the Senate and the House in enacting the Act to address the overwhelming medical and scientific uncertainty surrounding such claims and to promote uniformity and consistency in the adjudication of radiation exposure-based claims.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Nix v. Brown · Walls v. Brown
“[A] veteran may not establish direct service connection, based solely on radiation exposure, if the veteran’s disability is not one of the enumerated ‘radiogenic diseases’ under 38 C.F.R. § 3 .311b(b)(2), and ... the provisions of 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303 (d), 3.311b(h) do not afford an alternative basis for establishing direct service connection for a disease on the basis that the disease is the product of exposure to ionizing radiation.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Lasovick v. Brown · Combee v. Brown

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.