Gray v. Richardson’s Empirical Analysis
474 F.2d 1370 · 1973
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently August 2010 · most notably Stone v. Williams (1992), Purnell v. City of Akron (1991)
12 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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. § 416 (§ 216 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Burrus · New York Stock Exchange v. Legate · Perez v. United States · Western Natural Gas Co. v. Cities Service Gas Co. · Cain v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Ajlthough the Secretary is not bound by the decision of a State trial court in a proceeding to which he was not a party, he is not free to ignore an adjudication of a State trial court where the following prerequisites are found: (1) an issue in a claim for Social Security benefits previously has been determined by a State court of competent jurisdiction; (2) this issue was genuinely contested before the State court by parties with opposing interests; (3) the issue falls within the general category of domestic relations law; and (4) the resolution by the State trial court is consistent with the law enunciated by the highest court in the State.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[s]ince this is a situation falling within the general category of domestic relations, special deference should be given by federal tribunals to the resolution by the State court. Traditionally the states, not the federal government, have been considered the exclusive arbiter of these problems.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“apply such law as would be applied in determining the devolution of intestate personal property by the courts of the State in which [the] insured individual is domiciled ... at the time of his death,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.