Nielson v. Shinseki’s Empirical Analysis
607 F.3d 802 · 2010
Citation profile
6 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 38 U.S.C. § 101 (Agent Orange Act of 1991) · 38 U.S.C. § 105 · 38 U.S.C. § 1151 · 38 U.S.C. § 1712 · 38 U.S.C. § 7292
Relies on Food & Drug Administration v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. · Perrin v. United States · Gustafson v. Alloyd Co. · American Tobacco Co. v. Patterson · Brown v. Gardner
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is a 'fundamental canon of statutory construction that the words of a statute must be read in their context and with a view to their place in the overall statutory scheme.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“is only applicable after other interpretive guidelines have been exhausted, including Chevron”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Heino v. Shinseki
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.