Ferran v. Flemming’s Empirical Analysis
293 F.2d 568 · 1961
Citation profile
50 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 93 later decisions — most recently April 1987 · most notably Jake ROWE Et Al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee (1972), Johnson v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (1974)
50 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions
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
Relies on Kerner v. Flemming · Butler v. Flemming · 168 F. Supp. 291 - Aaron v. Fleming · Mitchell v. Mitchell Truck Line, Inc.
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 93 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]f there is no market for the services he is able to render then he is truly disabled within the meaning of the statute”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Our review is ordinarily, of course, limited to determining merely whether there is substantial evidence to support the administrative findings. But here, just as in the ‘clearly erroneous’ review of a judge’s findings, when the fact-finder has failed to employ the proper legal standard in making its determination the finding may not stand.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““If there was any work which this Claimant was able to perform, the record fails to disclose it. We do not mean by that to suggest that the formal burden is on the Government to make any such specific showing since the statute puts the general burden on the claimant. But in the context of this Act and the manner in which, out of necessity, it has to be administered with much informality and in great volume, satisfaction of the claimant's statutory obligation is to be judged in a practical way. [Citation omitted.] Considering the background, experience, training, education, physical and mental capabilities of the Claimant, the kinds and types of employments formerly followed and no longer open to him, the absence of any indication of any specific work less exacting within his residual competency and reasonably available as a prospective source of employment in the general area where he lives, this record satisfies that test. When the Claimant could no longer even shuffle dominoes, he was not required by the use of the catalogue of the nation’s industrial occupations to go down the list and verbally negative his capacity for each of them or their availability to him as an actual opportunity for employment.” (Emphasis supplied.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.