Coburn v. McHugh’s Empirical Analysis
679 F.3d 924 · 2012
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 20 district ·
Relationships
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 1552 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 5 U.S.C. § 704 · 5 U.S.C. § 706
Relies on Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of United States Inc v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company Consumer Alert · United States v. L. A. Tucker Truck Lines, Inc. · Chappell v. Wallace · Unemployment Compensation Commission v. Aragon · Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation v. LTV Corp.
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“At the very least, the Board must 'provide an explanation that will enable the court to evaluate the agency's rationale at the time of decision.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“is owed no deference if it fails to 'give a reason that a court can measure ... against the arbitrary or capricious standard of the APA.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) Is a medical evaluation and referral to a MEB under Army Regulation 635-40 ¶ 4-9 separate and distinct from an evaluation and action taken by a MEB under Army Regulation 635-40 ¶ 4-10? (2) Is it possible for a physician to "initiate a MEB” without necessarily "referring” a case to a MEB? If so, what supports this conclusion? To what extent do initiation and referral overlap with the concept of "physical disability processing”? (3) Was [plaintiff's] case referred to a MEB, or did Dr. Caycedo mean something else when he wrote "MEB initiated”? (4) If [plaintiff’s] case was not referred to a MEB, what in the record and regulations supports this conclusion? If [plaintiff's] case was not referred to a MEB, on what authority did Dr. Caycedo and Dr. Schirneract when they "abruptly terminated” the MEB? (5) If [plaintiff’s] case was .referred to a MEB, on what authority did Dr. Caycedo and Dr. Schirner act when they "abruptly terminated” the MEB? In other words, how could Dr. Caycedo and Dr. Schirner terminate [plaintiff's] MEB when they were not members of the MEB?”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Coburn v. McHugh
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.