Harbot v. Berryhill’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Bowen v. City of New York · Rosa v. Callahan · Parker v. Harris · Albert Shaw v. Shirley S. Chater, as Commissioner of the Social Security Administration · Snell v. Apfel
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Remand for the purpose of calculation of benefits is warranted where the record demonstrates the claimant's disability, and where there is no reason to conclude that there is additional evidence to support the Commissioner's claim that a claimant is not disabled.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[p]er the testimony of the vocational expert at plaintiff's hearing, an individual with these limitations would not be able to meet the demands of any job”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“frequently ... [be] unable to complete a workday,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.