152 F. Supp. 2d 955 - Crosby v. Halter’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2412 · 42 U.S.C. § 416 (§ 216 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Pierce v. Underwood · Commissioner, Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Jean · Sullivan v. Hudson · Herron v. Shalala · Pope v. Shalala
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“One of Congress’ expectations in enacting the EAJA was to attract private counsel to represent meritorious disability claimants. Congress was concerned that persons “may be deterred from seeking review of, or defending against, unreasonable governmental action because of the expense involved.” Sullivan v. Hudson, 490 U.S. 877, 883 , 109 S.Ct. 2248, 2253 , 104 L.Ed.2d 941 (1989).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Jenkins 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.