Renfrow v. Astrue’s Empirical Analysis
496 F.3d 918 · 2007
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 5 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently September 2021
6 federal appellate · 5 district ·
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. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Massachi v. Astrue · Hillier v. Social Security Administration
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he Commission’s own policy, SSR 00-4p, mandates: “When a [vocational expert] or [vocational specialist] provides evidence about the requirements of a job or occupation, the adjudicator has an affirmative responsibility to ask about any possible conflict between that [vocational expert] or [vocational specialist] evidence and the information provided in the [Dictionary of Occupational Titles ].” The ALJ was required not only to ask the expert whether there was a conflict, but also to obtain an explanation for any such conflict. Massachi v. As- true, 486 F.3d 1149 , 1152 & n. 7 (9th Cir.2007) (collecting cases).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jones v. Astrue
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.