27 F. Supp. 2d 554 - Maniaci v. Apfel’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 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 Perez v. Chater · Smith v. Califano · Ventura v. Shalala · Echevarria v. Secretary of Health & Human Services · Falco 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.
“* When no additional medical evidence is received, but in the opinion of the [ALJ] ... the symptoms, signs, and laboratory findings reported in the case record suggest that a judgment of equivalence may be reasonable; or *When additional medical evidence is received that in the opinion of the [ALJ] ... may change the State agency medical or psychological- consultant’s finding that the impairment(s) is-not equivalent in severity to any impairment in the Listing of Impairments.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Diehl v. Barnhart
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.