Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 457 F.2d 758 - Beane v. Richardson

Beane v. Richardson’s Empirical Analysis

457 F.2d 758 · 1972

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
1
states following
February 1995
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 7 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently February 1995 · most notably Gallant v. Heckler (1984), 16558a Hamilton v. Secretary of Health & Human Services of United States (1992)

22 federal appellate · 7 district · 1 state decisions

230197219801990decided

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. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 416 (§ 216 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Dredge Corp. v. Penny · Mark v. Celebrezze · Rhinehart v. Finch · Harvey 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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “On appeal to this court, the findings of the Secretary are conclusive if supported by substantial evidence looking to the record as a whole. Harvey v. Richardson, 451 F.2d 589 (9th Cir. 1971), Rhinehart v. Finch, 438 F.2d 920 (9th Cir. 1971). Likewise, the statutory restriction upon our review applies to the inferences drawn from such facts, if they have a substantial basis in the record. Mark v. Celebrezze, 348 F.2d 289 (9th Cir. 1965).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The judicial determination of this administrative finding presents only an issue of law and not a question of fact. It is, therefore, a proper issue to raise by summary judgment. (Citations omitted.)”
    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.