Carradine v. Barnhart’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

33 federal appellate · 3 district ·

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

1. “[s]uch an inference would amount to an accusation that the medical workers who treated [the claimant] were behaving unprofessionally.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Diaz v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America · Maher v. Massachusetts General Hospital Long Term Disability Plan

2. “The issue in the case is not the existence of these various conditions of hers but their severity and, concretely, whether, as she testified ... they have caused her such severe pain that she cannot work full time.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Tracie H. v. Saul · 384 F. Supp. 3d 928 - Heather M. v. Berryhill

3. “In evaluating, an individual’s symptoms, our adjudicators will not assess an individual’s overall character, or truthfulness in the manner typically used during an adversarial court litigation.. The focus of the evaluation of an individual’s symptoms should not be to determine whether he or she is a truthful person. Rather, our adjudicators will focus on whether the evidence establishes a medically determinable impairment that could reasonably be expected to produce the individual’s symptoms and given the adjudicator’s evaluation of the individual’s symptoms, whether - the intensity and persistence of the symptoms limit the individual’s ability to perform work-related activities or, for a child with a title XVI disability claim, limit the child’s ability to function independently, appropriately, and effectively in an age-appropriate manner.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Geer v. Berryhill · Johnson v. Barnhart