Lax v. Astrue’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 federal appellate · 33 district ·

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 137 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “It requires more than a scintilla, but less than a preponderance.”

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Cowan v. Astrue · BNSF Railway Co. v. United States Department of Labor

2. “Step one requires the claimant to demonstrate that he is not presently engaged in substantial gainful activity. At step two, the claimant must show that he has a medically severe impairment or combination of impairments. At step three, if a claimant can show that the impairment is equivalent to a listed impairment, he is presumed to be disabled and entitled to benefits. If a claimant cannot meet a listing at step three, he continues to step four, which requires the claimant to show that the impairment or combination of impairments prevents him from performing his past work. If the claimant successfully meets this burden, the burden of proof shifts to the Commissioner at step five to show that the claimant retains sufficient RFC [residual functional capacity] to perform work in the national economy, given her age, education, and work experience. If a determination can be made at any of the steps that a claimant is or is not disabled, evaluation under a subsequent step is not necessary.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Wilson v. Astrue · Sida v. Soc. Sec. Admin.

3. “Further, In this context, “disability” requires both an inability to engage in any substantial gainful activity and a physical or mental impairment, which provides reason for the inability. The impairment must be a medically determinable physical or mental impairment which can be expected to result in death or which 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
   e.g. Cowan v. Astrue · 281 F. App'x 834 - Cowan v. Astrue