Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 14 F. Supp. 2d 839 - Alexander v. Apfel

14 F. Supp. 2d 839 - Alexander v. Apfel’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
June 2009
most recently cited

1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1381 (§ 1601 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1382C (§ 1614 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1383 (§ 1631 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Underwood v. Ribicoff · Walker v. Bowen · Oppenheim v. Finch · Vitek v. Finch

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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In Wilkins , the Appeals Council had considered the ‘interim’ evidence, but denied further review without setting forth specific findings as to the weight accorded the new evidence. Upon its own consideration of the ‘interim’ evidence, the Fourth Circuit found that the record clearly supported Wilkins’ application for benefits. Accordingly, the Fourth Circuit reversed the Commissioner without requiring additional administrative proceedings. The court does not believe that the decision in Wilkins speaks to the situation in which the ‘interim’ evidence merely serves to create a conflict with other evidence already of record. In that circumstance, the court believes that it is still necessary for the Commissioner to indicate his reasons in support of the resolution of the factual conflicts, so that the court may undertake a meaningful substantial evidence review. The court finds ‘good cause’ for remand of the instant case for this purpose.”
    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.