Orn v. Astrue’s Empirical Analysis
511 F.3d 1217 · 2008
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently April 2023
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from California Eastern District Court)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2412 · 42 U.S.C. § 1988
Relies on Hensley v. Eckerhart · Pierce v. Underwood · Hutto v. Finney · Hanrahan v. Hampton · Orn v. Astrue
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Taken as a whole, our rules recognize the propriety of this court considering a request for EAJA attorney’s fees and costs in the first instance.”); McCarthy v. Bowen, 824 F.2d 182, 183 (2d Cir.1987) (”
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.