Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs v. Barnes & Tucker Co.’s Empirical Analysis
969 F.2d 1524 · 1992
Citation profile
21 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently February 2011 · most notably Elliot Coal Mining Co. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (1994), Labelle Processing Co. v. Swarrow (1995)
21 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
Relies on Udall v. Tallman · Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co. · Potomac Electric Power Co. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs · Kertesz v. Crescent Hills Coal Co. · Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs v. Mangifest
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“we will not defer to an 'interpretation' in an adversary proceeding that strains 'the plain and natural meaning of words in a standard,' ... nor will we give deference to an interpretation of a regulation that implies language that does not exist in the regulation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“defer to an agency's consistent interpretation of its own regulations unless it is 'plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[w]e owe such deference to the Director, not to the Board, for the Director makes policy under the Black Lung Act.”
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.