Damrel v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2022 · most notably Crippen v. Brown (1996), Robert J. Ingram v. R. James Nicholson (2007)
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. § 1112 · 38 U.S.C. § 1318 · 38 U.S.C. § 7252 · 38 U.S.C. § 7261
Relies on Russell v. Principi · Karnas v. Derwinski · Fugo v. Brown · Murincsak v. Derwinski · Bell 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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“While the Secretary is deemed to have constructive knowledge of [VA-generated documents not actually before the RO], see Bell [,supra ], the question is whether the information should be deemed to be in the record as of 1967. The answer is no. Under Russell, 3 Vet.App. at 314 , only the “law that existed at the time” of the prior adjudication ... can be considered. The constructive notice rule of Bell was not formulated until 1992....”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Lynch v. Gober
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.