Teal v. Mathews’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently January 2003
2 federal appellate · 3 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1383 (§ 1631 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Laws v. Celebrezze · Thomas v. Celebrezze · Underwood v. Ribicoff · Blalock v. Richardson
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The right to counsel in [a disability benefits] hearing is significantly different than the same right in a court proceeding.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“is necessitated only where there is a showing of unfairness, prejudice or procedural hurdles insurmountable by laymen.”
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.