Mounts v. Finch’s Empirical Analysis
1969
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 416 (§ 216 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Central Railroad v. Pennsylvania · Laws v. Celebrezze · Thomas v. Celebrezze · Underwood v. Ribicoff · Celebrezze v. Bolas
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““essential to an obvious interrelation of the four elements of proof the fact finder must recognize in determining a claimant’s ability or inability to engage in any substantial gainful activity. . . This interrelation includes (1) the objective medical facts, which are the clinical findings of treating or examining physicians divorced from their expert judgments or opinion as to the significance of these clinical findings, (2) the diagnoses and expert medical opinions of the treating and examining physicians on subsidiary questions of fact, (3) the subjective evidence of pain and disability as testified to by claimant, and (4) claimant’s educational background,' work history and present age.” Mounts v. Finch, 304 F.Supp. 910, 917 (S.D.W.Va.1969) (citing Underwood v. Ribicoff, supra).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“For purposes of this subsection, a “physical or mental impairment” is an impairment that results from anatomical, physiological, or psychological abnormalities which are demonstrable by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory techniques.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lucas v. Richardson
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.