Ray O. Hedge v. Elliot L. Richardson, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare’s Empirical Analysis
458 F.2d 1065 · 1972
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 7 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently August 1995 · most notably Buchman v. Board of Education (1995), Fowler v. Bowen (1989)
12 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
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 Hanes v. Celebrezze · Wilson v. Richardson · Leftwich v. Gardner · Kutchman v. Cohen
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Judicial review under ... 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g), is limited to an inquiry of whether there is substantial evidence on the record as a whole to support the findings of the Secretary.” [Emphasis added.]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“inability to engage in any substantial gainful activity....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The committee also believes it is necessary to reaffirm that an individual who does substantial gainful work despite an impairment or impairments that otherwise might be considered disabling is not disabled for purposes of establishing a period of disability or for social security benefits based on disability during any period in which such work is performed. The language in the . . . bill, therefore, specifically provides that where the work or earnings of an impaired individual demonstrate ability to engage in substantial gainful activity under criteria prescribed by the Secretary, the individual is not disabled within the meaning of title II of the Social Security Act.” U.S.Code, Cong. and Admin.News, 90th Cong., 1st Sess, p. 2883 (1967).”
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.