Combs v. Gardner’s Empirical Analysis
382 F.2d 949 · 1967
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 5 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently August 2008 · most notably LeMaster v. Weinberger (1976), Hensley v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (1981)
26 federal appellate · 5 district ·
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 Miracle v. Celebrezze · Branham v. Gardner · Marion v. Gardner · Walston v. Gardner
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Substantial evidence means more than a scintilla; it is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It has been noted that the Social Security Act is remedial in nature, and that a liberal construction in favor of disability, if such is reasonably made out, is therefore required.” 382 F.2d at 956 .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Substantial evidence means more than a scintilla; it is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind would accept as adequate to support a conclusion. (Citation omitted.) It has been noted that the Social Security Act is remedial in nature, and that a liberal construction in favor of disability, if such is reasonably made out, is therefore required. (Citations omitted.) 31 "* * * `Substantial evidence does not sustain a Hearing Examiner's decision when it is based almost exclusively on a medical report of a physician making a single examination of a claimant, when two doctors who treated him over a period of years stated that he was totally incapacitated.' Miracle v. Celebrezze, supra, [6 Cir., 1965, 351 F.2d 361 ] 351 F.2d at 379.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Berven v. Gardner
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.