34 F. Supp. 2d 1373 - Durham v. Apfel’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

cited by 4 later decisions

July 2016

most recently cited

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 416 (§ 216 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · Walker v. United States · DePaepe v. Richardson · Cowart v. Schweiker · Martin v. Sullivan

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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

“Mr. Durham’s work history does not support the ALJ’s implication that he successfully worked for 40 years. He had no earnings whatsoever in nine years between 1953 and 1991, and minimal earnings several other years (TR 101-102). Mr. Durham has worked primarily as a heavy laborer (TR 46). There is no evidence that these jobs are beyond the reach of a mildly retarded individual.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. 726 F. Supp. 2d 1349 - Monroe v. Astrue · 678 F. Supp. 2d 1250 - Black v. Astrue
“Unlike Mr. Popp, Mr. Durham’s work experience does not include technical jobs, but jobs as a laborer. He did not teach high school algebra, he worked as a tire repairer, laborer, kitchen helper and material handler (TR 46). Mr. Durham did not go to college, he went to the fourth grade.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. 726 F. Supp. 2d 1349 - Monroe v. Astrue · 678 F. Supp. 2d 1250 - Black v. Astrue

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.