I.T.O. Corp. of Baltimore v. Benefits Review Board’s Empirical Analysis
563 F.2d 646 · 1977
Citation profile
17 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 1996
17 federal appellate ·
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 Northeast Marine Terminal Co. v. Caputo · I. T. O. Corporation of Baltimore, Employer, and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Carrier v. Benefits Review Board, U. S. Department of Labor, William T. Adkins, International Longshoremen's Association, Amicus Curiae. Maritime Terminals, Inc., and Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. v. Secretary of Labor, and Donald D. Brown, Maritime Terminals, Inc., and Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. v. Vernie Lee Harris, and United States Department of Labor, National Association of Stevedores v. Benefits Review Board, U. S. Dept. Of Labor, William T. Adkins · I.T.O. Corporation of Baltimore, Employer, and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Carrier v. Benefits Review Board, U.S. Department of Labor, William T. Adkins, International Longshoreman's Association, Amicus Curiae. Maritime Terminals, Inc., and Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. v. Secretary of Labor, and Donald D. Brown, Maritime Terminals, Inc., and Aetna Casualty and Surety Co. v. Vernie Lee Harris, and United States Department of Labor, National Association of Stevedores v. Benefits Review Board, U.S. Dept. Of Labor, William T. Adkins
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, Department of Labor, is not a proper respondent in a petition for review ... although upon application and for good cause shown he may be permitted to intervene therein.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“although upon application and for good cause shown he may be permitted to intervene therein.”
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.