Barrett v. Asture’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Williams v. Bowen · Diaz v. Secretary of Health & Human Services · Hawkins v. Chater · Hackett v. Barnhart · Robert M. Haddock v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner, Social Security Administration
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.
“indicated that he had ... considered the entire record and all of [the] claimant's symptoms to the extent ... they were reasonably consistent with the evidence, including the objective medical evidence”). 3 . An ALJ could, of course, find at step two that a medically determinable impairment posed no restriction on the claimant’s work activities. See 20 C.F.R. §§ 404 .1520a(c)(4), 416.920a(c)(4) (permitting ALJ to find that degree of limitation in each of the four relevant functional areas is”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Wells v. Colvin · Wells 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.