Domozik v. Cohen’s Empirical Analysis
413 F.2d 5 · 1969
Citation profile
43 federal appellate · 7 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 99 later decisions — most recently August 2006 · most notably Dobrowolsky v. Califano (1979), Samuel C. EVANGELISTA, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant, Appellee (1987)
43 federal appellate · 7 district · 2 state decisions
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 Grose v. Cohen · Anthony Saperito v. Iowa · Walters v. Gardner · In Re Decker
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 99 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““§ 404.937 Dismissal for cause. The hearing examiner may, on his own motion, dismiss a hearing request, either entirely or as to any stated issue, under any of the following circumstances : (a) Res judicata,. Where there has been a previous determination or decision by the Secretary with respect to the rights of the same party on the same facts pertinent to the same issue or issues which has become final either by judicial affirmance or, without judicial consideration, upon the claimant’s failure timely to request reconsideration, hearing, or review, or to commence a civil action with respect to such determination or decision (see §§ 404.911, 404.918, 404.946, and 404.951). (Emphasis added.) * * *»”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““[2] Finally, we find no merit in appellant’s contention, raised for the first time at oral argument, that the case should be sent back for further review by the Secretary because appellant was not represented by counsel in the prior applications or in the hearing before the Examiner in the present suit. In the absence of a showing of clear prejudice or unfairness at the agency level proceedings, the lack of counsel is not a sufficient cause for remand. See Steimer v. Gardner, 395 F.2d 197 (9th Cir. 1968).” 413 F.2d at 9 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““[T]he term ‘disability’ means (A) 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 has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months”
2 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.