Daniels v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 38 U.S.C. § 105 · 38 U.S.C. § 1110 · 38 U.S.C. § 1310 · 38 U.S.C. § 7104 · 38 U.S.C. § 7252 · 38 U.S.C. § 7261
Relies on Gilbert v. Derwinski · Colvin v. Derwinski · Manio v. Derwinski · Masors v. Derwinski · Espiritu 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]n all cases[,] section 105 establishes a presumption in favor of a finding of line of duty. If the BVA finds that an exception does apply (in this case, willful misconduct), and denies the claim solely on the basis of such exception, the Board must establish that denial of the claim is justified by a preponderance of the evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Forshey v. West
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.