Bradley v. Colvin’s Empirical Analysis
2015
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Schaal v. Apfel · Mongeur v. Heckler · Halloran v. Barnhart · Snell v. Apfel
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[c]ourts in the Second Circuit have regularly acknowledged that remand instructions to an [hearing officer] from a federal district court in Social Security cases constitute the law of the case” and listing cases that accord with this principle). This doctrine,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Rorick v. Colvin
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.