Duncan v. West’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 1096 · 10 U.S.C. § 1102 · 10 U.S.C. § 2731 · 10 U.S.C. § 2733 · 10 U.S.C. § 2734 · 10 U.S.C. § 2735 · 28 U.S.C. § 2671 · 28 U.S.C. § 2680
Relies on Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner · Block v. Community Nutrition Institute · Bowen v. Michigan Academy of Family Physicians · United States v. Caceres · Lindahl v. Office of Personnel Management
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[S]ection 2735 is clear on its face. The statute does not merely say that the agency decision is "final," or "final and conclusive." Rather, the statute states that the Secretary's decision is "final and conclusive" "notwithstanding any other provision of law." To interpret the section as precluding only further administrative review would be to render meaningless the phrase "notwithstanding any other provision of law."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the overwhelming weight of judicial authority, indeed seven circuits and numerous district courts, persuasively holds that § 2735 rebuts the presumption in favor of judicial review of an adverse administrative decision.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he provision's plain and unambiguous language makes unmistakably clear that the Army's determination is final in all circumstances.”
1 later decision 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.