Hall v. Chater’s Empirical Analysis
109 F.3d 1255 · 1997
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 6 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently September 2015 · most notably Page v. Astrue (2007), Jones v. Astrue (2010)
10 federal appellate · 6 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
Relies on Polaski v. Heckler · Roe v. Chater · Johnson v. Chater · Jenkins v. Bowen · Cruze v. Chater
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.
“reliance on the DOT as a definitive authority on job requirements is misplaced, however, for DOT definitions are simply generic job descriptions that offer the approximate maximum requirements for each position, rather than their range.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The DOT itself cautions that its descriptions may not coincide in every respect with the content of jobs as performed in particular establishments or at certain localities. In other words, not all of the jobs in every category have requirements identical to or as rigorous as those listed in the DOT.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jones v. Astrue
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.