Julie Amber-Messick, Administratrix of the Estate of Christopher Kangas, Deceased v. United States (2007)

green · 34 citation events across 3 courts. Showing the 15 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).

All Green 15

Treatment trajectory · 2007 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then

200720162026

Sort: By significance · Most recent

green Juneau v. Department of Justice (2009)

Rule Authority · Fed. Cir. · 4 citations in this opinion

DISCUSSION Our review of a denial of benefits under the PSOB Act by the BJA is limited to three inquiries: “(1) whether there has been substantial compliance with statutory requirements and provisions of implementing regulations; (2) whether there has been any arbitrary or capricious action on the part of the government officials involved; and (3) whether substantial evidence supports the decision denying the claim.” Amber-Messiek v. United States, 483 F.3d 1316, 1321 (Fed.C…

green Lobo v. DOJ (2025)

Rule Authority · Fed. Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion

Cir. 2020) (quoting Am- ber-Messick v. United States, 483 F.3d 1316, 1321 (Fed.

green Watkins v. DOJ (2020)

Rule Authority · Fed. Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion

Cir. 2020) (quoting Amber-Messick v. United States, 483 F.3d 1316, 1321 (Fed.

green Moore v. Department of Justice (2014)

Rule Authority · Fed. Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion

Disoussion We review the BJA’s decision to deny claims under the Benefits Act to determine “ ‘(1) whether there has been substantial compliance with statutory requirements and provisions of implementing regulations; (2) whether there has been any arbitrary or capricious action on the part of the government officials involved; and (3) whether substantial evidence supports the decision denying the claim.’ ” Id. (quoting Amber-Messick v. United States, 483 F.3d 1316, 1321 (Fed.…

green Groff v. United States (2007)

Rule Authority · Fed. Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion

Amber-Messick v. United States, 483 F.3d 1316, 1321 (Fed.Cir.2007); Chacon, 48 F.3d at 511 .

green Afolayan v. DOJ (2026)

Rule Authority · Fed. Cir.

We review the Bureau’s denial of a claim for death ben- efits for: “(1) whether there has been substantial compli- ance with statutory requirements and provisions of implementing regulations; (2) whether there has been any arbitrary or capricious action on the part of the government officials involved; and (3) whether substantial evidence supports the decision denying the claim.” Amber-Messick v. United States, 483 F.3d 1316, 1321 (Fed.

first citing Yanco v. United States, 258 F.3d 1356, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2001); and then citing Chacon v. United States, 48 F.3d 508, 511 (Fed. Cir. 1995)

green Afolayan v. DOJ (2022)

Rule Authority · Fed. Cir.

DISCUSSION We review the Bureau’s denial of a claim for death ben- efits for: “(1) whether there has been substantial compli- ance with statutory requirements and provisions of implementing regulations; (2) whether there has been any arbitrary or capricious action on the part of the government officials involved; and (3) whether substantial evidence supports the decision denying the claim.” Amber-Messick v. United States, 483 F.3d 1316, 1321 (Fed.

green Afolayan v. DOJ (2022)

Rule Authority · Fed. Cir.

green Goodrich v. DOJ (2021)

Rule Authority · Fed. Cir.

DISCUSSION Our review of a denial of a claim for death benefits by the BJA “is limited to three inquiries: (1) whether there has been substantial compliance with statutory requirements and provisions of implementing regulations; (2) whether there has been any arbitrary or capricious action on the part of the government officials involved; and (3) whether substantial evidence supports the decision denying the claim.” Amber-Messick v. United States, 483 F.3d 1316, 1321 (Fed.

green Li v. DOJ (2020)

Rule Authority · Fed. Cir.

We review the BJA’s application of its own regulations to determine “(1) whether there has been substantial com- pliance with statutory requirements and provisions of im- plementing regulations; (2) whether there has been any arbitrary or capricious action on the part of the government officials involved; and (3) whether substantial evidence supports the decision denying the claim.” Amber-Messick v. United States, 483 F.3d 1316, 1321 (Fed.

green Sledge v. DOJ (2019)

Quote Authority · Fed. Cir. · signal: cf.

Cf. Amber-Messick v. United States, 483 F.3d 1316, 1325 (Fed.

“[W]e find unpersuasive Mrs. Amber–Messick’s contention that the fact she received ben- efits under the Pennsylvania Emergency Law Enforcement Personnel Death Benefits Act supports her claim under PSOBA.”

green Hesson v. Department of Justice (2016)

Rule Authority · Fed. Cir.

DISCUSSION “Our review of a denial of benefits under the PSOB Act by the BJA is limited to three inquiries: ‘(1) whether there has been substantial compliance with statutory requirements and provisions of implementing regulations; (2) whether there has been any arbitrary or capricious action on the part of the government officials involved; and (3) whether substantial evidence supports the decision denying the claim.’ ” Id. (quoting Amber-Messick v. United States, 483 F.3d 1…

green Coleman v. United States (2025)

Rule Authority · Fed. Cl.

Amber-Messick v. United States, 483 F.3d 1316, 1321 (Fed.

first citing Yanco v. United States, 258 F.3d 1356, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2001); and then citing Chacon v. United States, 48 F.3d 508, 511 (Fed. Cir. 1995)

green Intermountain Insurance Service of Vail, Ltd. Liability Co. v. Commissioner (2010)

Rule Authority · Tax Ct.

Cir. 1995) (same); and • Federal Circuit—Amber-Messick v. United States, 483 F.3d 1316, 1323-1324 (Fed.

used in both steps

green Fathauer v. United States (2008)

Rule Authority · Fed. Cl.

Amber-Messick v. United States, 483 F.3d 1316, 1323 (Fed.Cir.2007).