Richardson v. Belcher’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
350 federal appellate · 199 district · 283 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,474 later decisions (87 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2021 · most notably Mathews v. Eldridge (1976), San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973)
350 federal appellate · 199 district · 283 state decisions — followed in 34 states
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 Goldberg v. Kelly · Dandridge v. Williams · Bolling v. Sharpe · Flemming v. Nestor · Williams v. Rhodes
Cited together with Dandridge v. Williams · Flemming v. Nestor · Weinberger v. Salfi · Bolling v. Sharpe · Jefferson v. Hackney
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 1,474 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“rationally based and free from invidious discrimination.”
46 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) If for any month prior to the month in which an individual attains the age of 62: (1) such individual is entitled to benefits under section 223 of this title, and (2) such individual is entitled for such month, under a workmen’s compensation law or plan of the United States or a State, to periodic benefits for a total or partial disability (whether or not permanent), and the Secretary has, in a prior month, received notice of such entitlement for such month, the total of his benefits under section 223 of this title for such month and of any benefits under section 202 of this title for such month based on his wages and self-employment income shall be reduced (but not below zero) by the amount by which the sum of— (3) such total of benefits under section 223 and 202 of this title for such month, and (4) such periodic benefits payable (and actually paid) for such month to such individual under the workmen’s compensation law or plan, exceeds the higher of— (5) 80 per centum of his “average current earnings”, or, (6) the total of such individual’s disability insurance benefits under section 223 of this title for such month and of any monthly insurance benefits under section 202 of this title for such month based on his wages and self-employment income, prior to reduction under this section.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“impose a constitutional limitation on the power of Congress to make substantive changes in the law of entitlement to public benefits.”
11 later decisions 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.