Barnett v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
83 F.3d 1380 · 1996
Citation profile
5 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently October 2015 · most notably Zevalkink v. Brown (1996), 11 Vet. App. 468 - Marsh v. West (1998)
5 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
Applies 38 U.S.C. § 5108 · 38 U.S.C. § 7104 · 38 U.S.C. § 7105 · 38 U.S.C. § 7292
Relies on Fw/pbs Inc II v. City of Dallas Mjr Inc · Johnson v. Derwinski · Spencer v. Brown · Barnett v. Brown
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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'It is well-established judicial doctrine that any statutory tribunal must ensure that it has jurisdiction over each case before adjudicating the merits, that a potential jurisdictional defect may be raised by the court or tribunal, sua sponte or by any party at any stage in the proceedings, and, once apparent, must be adjudicated.'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[e]xcept as provided in section 5108 of this title, when a claim is disallowed by the Board, the claim may not thereafter be reopened and allowed and a claim based upon the same factual basis may not be considered.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he Board does not have jurisdiction to consider a claim which it previously adjudicated unless new and material evidence is presented, and before the Board may reopen such a claim it must so find.”
2 later decisions 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.