Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 362 F.2d 864 - Baker v. Gardner

Baker v. Gardner’s Empirical Analysis

362 F.2d 864 · 1966

Citation profile

62
cited by 62 later decisions
1
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably Barrett v. Otis Elevator Co. (1968), Kent v. Schweiker (1983)

7 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions

210196619701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Thomas v. Celebrezze · Kerner v. Flemming · Butler v. Flemming · Miracle v. Celebrezze · Cyrus v. Celebrezze

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

  1. ““Mere theoretical ability to engage in substantial gainful activity is not enough if no reasonable opportunity for this is available.” Janek v. Celebrezze, supra, 336 F.2d at p. 833 .”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[that the claimant must establish an] inability to engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months ...”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““It is sufficient if a plaintiff offers evidence of an impairment, his work experience, his inability because of the impairment to do that work any longer, and his lack of particular experience ' for any other type of job. If there are other kinds of work available for which the plaintiff is suited, the Secretary must adduce some evidence from which a finding can be made that he can do some type of work, actually and not apparently. * * * In the absence of such a showing by the Secretary, a determination contrary to the plaintiff is not supported by substantial evidence.””
    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.