Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 393 F.2d 889 - Carnevale v. Gardner

Carnevale v. Gardner’s Empirical Analysis

393 F.2d 889 · 1968

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
July 2016
most recently cited

16 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably Parker v. Harris (1980), Gold v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare (1972)

16 federal appellate · 2 district ·

190196819701980199020002010decided

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 Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board · Thomas v. Celebrezze · Boyd v. Folsom · Bohms 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.

  1. “'evidence bearing'upon [plaintiff's] condition subsequent to the date [of eligibility]’ ’’ to the extent”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““It should also be noted that when this case was before the district court the appellant, who has acted pro se from the very commencement of his claim, attempted to have an official notification from the hospital regarding his August 1961 operation inserted into the Record. The district court refused to allow it, stating that the notification should have been incorporated into the Record during the administrative phase of the proceedings. While the district court may have been technically correct in refusing to take into consideration in its review of the case any materials not properly in the administrative record, see 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g); Fels v. Ribicoff, 30 F.R.D. 141 (S.D.N.Y.1962); Sage v. Celebrezze, 246 F.Supp. 285 (W.D.Va.1965), it was within the court’s power to remand the case to the administrative agency with directions that the additional evidence be there inserted into the record and that the claim be administratively reconsidered in light of the added evidence. 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g). See Bohms v. Gardner, 381 F.2d 283 (8 Cir. 1967); Sage v. Celebrezze, supra.””
    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.