Randall v. Goldmark’s Empirical Analysis
495 F.2d 356 · 1974
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 11 district · 5 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 42 U.S.C. § 602 (§ 402 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Dandridge v. Williams · St Paul Mercury Indemnity Co v. Red Cab Co · Hagans v. Lavine · Rosado v. Wyman
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * to qualify as a currently available resource under the Act and regulation, it need only he shown that regular payments made by third parties directly benefit an AFDC recipient in such a manner that they are actually used to defray expenses which such recipient would otherwise incur. [ 495 F. 2d at 361 ]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“* * * The mortgage payments made by plaintiff’s spouse directly to the mortgagee, pursuant to the probate court decree, though insufficient to meet the required monthly amount, nonetheless directly benefit plaintiff by reducing her necessary housing costs. Such a resource is “current” in the sense that its continued payment is guaranteed and enforceable. And it is “available” in the sense that such sums do actually reduce expenses for which plaintiff would otherwise be liable, [at 361]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Act of Congress providing for the protection of civil rights”
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.