11 Cal. 3d 856 - Cooper v. Swoap’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 133 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 140 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably 16 Cal. 3d 392 - Agricultural Labor Relations Board v. Superior Court (1976), 17 Cal. 3d 671 - Tripp v. Swoap (1976)
4 federal appellate · 133 state decisions
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. § 1382A (§ 1612 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 602 (§ 402 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Dandridge v. Williams · Rosado v. Wyman · King v. Smith · Jefferson v. Hackney · Lewis v. Martin
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 140 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is axiomatic, of course, that administrative regulations promulgated under the aegis of a general statutory scheme are only valid insofar as they are authorized by and consistent with the controlling statutes. ‘Administrative regulations that alter or amend the statute or enlarge or impair its scope are void and courts not only may, but it is their obligation to strike down such regulations.’ (Morris v. Williams (1967) 67 Cal.2d 733, 748 , 63 Cal.Rptr. 689, 699 , 433 P.2d 697, 707 ; Whitcomb Hotel, [Inc.] v. California Emp. Com. (1944) 24 Cal.2d 753, 757 , 151 P.2d 233 , [ 155 A.L.R. 405 ].””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“'noncash economic benefits,' " such as shared housing, as " 'income' " under the former AFDC program was invalid. ( Id. at p. 859, 115 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 524 P.2d 97 .) We explained that "under the governing provisions of the federal Social Security Act only a recipient's actual available income may be deducted from his basic welfare benefit; arbitrary or constructive 'presumptions' of income are not permissible.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Otherwise we must conclude that the Legislature, familiar with the long-standing administrative interpretation of income, manifested its approval by leaving the income provision of section 11008 unchanged.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.