Rowell v. Principi’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently April 2010 · most notably Hamilton v. Brown (1993), Bernard v. Brown (1993)
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 38 U.S.C. § 5107 · 38 U.S.C. § 5108 · 38 U.S.C. § 5110 · 38 U.S.C. § 7104 · 38 U.S.C. § 7105 · 38 U.S.C. § 7261
Relies on Gilbert v. Derwinski · Colvin v. Derwinski · Fletcher v. Derwinski · Murphy v. Derwinski · Manio v. Derwinski
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“failure to file a timely [Substantive] Appeal does not automatically foreclose an appeal, render a claim final, or deprive the [Board] of jurisdiction. Statutory section 7105(d)(3) and regulation § 19.124 (replaced by § 20.302(b)) provide that an RO may close an appeal for failure to respond to the SOC. However, the statute and regulations do not require an RO to close a claim in that situation; nor do they provide that the claim will become final if the claimant fails to file a timely [Substantive] Appeal.”
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.