Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 90 F.3d 1502 - Wyoming Fuel Company v. Director Office of Workers' Compensation Programs United States Department of Labor J

Wyoming Fuel Company v. Director Office of Workers' Compensation Programs United States Department of Labor J’s Empirical Analysis

90 F.3d 1502 · 1996

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
March 2014
most recently cited

19 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently March 2014 · most notably Peabody Coal Co. v. Spese (1997), Lovilia Coal Co. v. Harvey (1997)

19 federal appellate ·

130199620002010decided

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

Relies on Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · Sahara Coal Company v. Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor and Floyd McNew · Sharondale Corp. v. Ross · Tussey v. Island Creek Coal Co. · Thorn v. Itmann Coal Co.

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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[A] final finding by an Office of Workers' Compensation Program adjudicator that the claimant is not totally disabled due to pneumoconiosis repudiates any earlier medical determination to the contrary and renders prior medical advice to the contrary ineffective to trigger the running of the statute of limitations.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “each element that actually was decided adversely to the claimant in the prior denial.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “by permitting a claimant — when attempting to show a material change — to present evidence that merely shows the initial decision was in error, rather than limiting the evidence presented to that which shows that the claimant’s condition has worsened since the previous denial. Instead, ... the [administrative law judge] must apply a standard that denies the claimant the opportunity to relitigate the earlier denial of benefits while permitting the claimant to prove that his or her conditions have worsened materially since the earlier denial.”
    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.