Smith v. Shalala’s Empirical Analysis
31 F.3d 715 · 1994
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently December 2017 · most notably Roe v. Chater (1996), Newton v. Chater (1996)
13 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Cline v. Sullivan · Tennant v. Schweiker · Ghant v. Bowen · Stephens v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(u)nless the hypothetical question comprehensively describes the limitations on a claimant’s ability to function, a vocational expert will be unable to accurately assess whether jobs do exist for the claimant. Testimony elicited by hypothetical questions that do not relate with precision all of a claimant’s impairments cannot constitute substantial evidence to support the Secretary’s decision.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“Substantial evidence is 'such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“If a hypothetical question does not include all of the claimant's impairments, limitations, and restrictions, or it is otherwise inadequate, a vocational expert's response cannot constitute substantial evidence to support a conclusion of no disability.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hutton v. Apfel
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.