Goldstein’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently January 1995 · most notably Whitecliff, Inc. v. United States (1976), Whitecliff, Inc. v. United States (1976)
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. § 1395 (§ 1801 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Aquavella v. Richardson · Menominee Tribe of Indians v. United States · Camero v. United States · Coral Gables Convalescent Home, Inc. v. Richardson · 311 F. Supp. 405 - Schroeder Nursing Care, Inc. v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““2. As for the year 1967, the court holds that it is precluded by 42 U.S.C. § 1395 ff. and § 405(h) from reviewing or overturning the determination of the Provider Appeals Committee except insofar as such determination (a) may have involved or rested upon procedures which were constitutionally invalid or violative of the governing statute, or (b) may have substantially violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment or the provisions of the governing statute. See Schroeder Nursing Care, Inc. v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co., 311 F.Supp. 405 (E.D. Wisc., 1970); San Vincente Hospital v. Travellers Ins. Co., C.D.Calif., No. 71-2453-FW, August 10, 1972; Rothman v. Hospital Service of Southern California, C.D.Calif., No. 68-1325-JWC, April 19, 1972; Aquavella v. Richardson, 437 F.2d 397 (2d Cir. 1971); Coral Gables Convalescent Home, Inc. v. Richardson, 340 F.Supp. 646 (S.D.Fla., 1972); St. Jude Manor Nursing Home, Inc. v. Richardson, M.D.Fla., No. 72-681-Civ.-J-S, Oct. 3, 1972. With respect to these two types of claim, the court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1491 and the finality provisions of the medicare legislation do not bar judicial review.””
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.