Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 324 FAPPX 440 - Thibodeaux v. Astrue

Thibodeaux v. Astrue’s Empirical Analysis

2009

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
September 2017
most recently cited

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Newton v. Apfel · Greenspan v. Shalala · Johnson v. Bowen · Frank v. Barnhart

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.

  1. “Our review of the Commissioner’s decision is limited to two inquiries: (1) whether the decision is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole, and (2) whether the Commissioner applied the proper legal standard. Substantial evidence is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. It is more than a mere scintilla and less than a preponderance. In applying the substantial evidence standard, the court scrutinizes the record to determine whether such evidence is present, but may not reweigh the evidence or substitute its judgment for the Commissioner’s. Conflicts of evidence are for the Commissioner, not the courts, to resolve. If the Commissioner’s fact findings are supported by substantial evidence, they are conclusive.”
    1 later decision 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.