489 F. Supp. 521 - Halsted v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
4 district ·
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Brinker v. Weinberger · Emil C. Timmerman v. Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of H.E.W., Kenneth Marks v. Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of H.E.W. · Leonard H. Garrett v. Elliot L. Richardson, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare · Laffoon v. Califano · Hicks v. Califano
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Whether or not this new grid system of placing a claimant in various categories, and then concluding the availability of residual skills, which system is based upon a lengthy and extensive study, would replace the use of the vocational counselor, is of some concern to this Court. The Eighth Circuit has clearly indicated that when a Social Security claimant has met his burden of proof with evidence indicating that he is unable to return to his prior employment, said burden transfers to the Secretary to prove claimant’s ability to perform less rigorous occupations. ... A vocational counselor is recommended for this purpose.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Maurer v. Harris
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.