Carter v. Cleland’s Empirical Analysis
643 F.2d 1 · 1980
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Fugere v. Derwinski (1990), Dart v. United States (1988)
19 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions
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 28 U.S.C. § 293 · 38 U.S.C. § 101 (Agent Orange Act of 1991) · 38 U.S.C. § 541 · 5 U.S.C. § 553 (Administrative Procedure Act of 1946)
Relies on Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Johnson v. Robison · Indiana Employment Security Division v. Burney · Pickus v. United States Board of Parole · Rodway v. United States Department of Agriculture
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“merely clarif[y] or explain[ ] an existing rule or statute.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“On its face, the “birth by another rule” appears to be an administrative guideline rather than a regulation: it has never been subjected to the notice and comment requirement and it is not contained in the Code of Federal Regulations. In general, however, a rule’s form is not determinative of whether or not it should be classified as a regulation. [W]e must look to the guideline’s substance and practical effect.... The ‘birth by another rule’ simply embodies the Administrator’s interpretation of Congress’ continuous cohabitation requirement. ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the statute requires case-by-case determinations of fault and does not permit the creation of categories of conduct that operate automatically to exclude spouses from death benefits,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Kirkhuff v. Nimmo
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.