Spellman v. Shalala’s Empirical Analysis
1 F.3d 357 · 1993
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 8 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 104 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Newton v. Apfel (2000), Ripley v. Chater (1995)
14 federal appellate · 8 district ·
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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 401 (§ 201 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Richardson v. Perales · Reid v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance · Brady v. Heckler
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 104 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“PURPOSE: To state the policy and describe the relevant evidence to be considered when establishing the onset date of disability under the provisions of titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act (the Act) and implementing regulations .... INTRODUCTION: In addition to determining that an individual is disabled, the decision maker must also establish the onset date of disability. In many claims the onset date is critical; it may affect the period for which the individual can be paid and may even be determinative of whether the individual is entitled to or eligible for any benefits.... POLICY STATEMENT: The onset date of disability is the first day an individual is disabled as defined in the Act and the regulations.... A title II worker cannot be found disabled under the Act unless insured status is also met at a time when the evidence establishes the presence of a disabling condition(s)....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[iff reasonable inferences about the progression of the impairment cannot be made on the basis of the evidence in file and additional relevant medical evidence is not available, it may be necessary to explore other sources of documentation. Information may be obtained [with the claimant’s consent] from family members, friends, and former employers to ascertain why medical evidence is not available for the pertinent period and to furnish additional evidence regarding the course of the individual’s condition.[ 25 )”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]n cases involving slowly progressive impairments, when the medical evidence regarding the onset date of a disability is ambiguous and the Secretary must infer the onset date, [Social Security Ruling] 83-20 requires that that inference be based on an informed judgment. The Secretary cannot make such an inference without the assistance of a medical advisor. 84”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.