Murphy ex rel. Murphy v. Astrue’s Empirical Analysis
496 F.3d 630 · 2007
Citation profile
5 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently September 2022 · most notably Liskowitz v. Astrue (2009), Roddy v. Astrue (2013)
5 federal appellate ·
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. § 1382C (§ 1614 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Rohan v. Chater · Skarbek v. Barnhart · Golembiewski v. Barnhart · Prochaska v. Barnhart · Wilder v. Chater
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.
“did not explain why he gave no weight to the portions of the school documents which support a finding that [the claimant] is disabled,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A]n ALJ cannot play the role of doctor and interpret medical evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Keiper v. Berryhill“evidence of his inability to attend and complete tasks”
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.