Cutler v. Weinberger’s Empirical Analysis
516 F.2d 1282 · 1975
Citation profile
57 federal appellate · 11 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 238 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably Parker v. Harris (1980), Marcus v. Califano (1979)
57 federal appellate · 11 district · 2 state decisions
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) · 42 U.S.C. § 416 (§ 216 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Gold v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare · Stark v. Weinberger · Hicks v. Gardner
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 238 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(c)ourts have not hesitated to remand for the taking of additional evidence, on good cause shown, where relevant, probative, and available evidence was either not before the Secretary or was not explicitly weighed and considered by him, although such consideration was necessary to a just determination of claimant's application.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“While a claimant must show that the physical or mental impairment by reason of which he claims to be disabled “results from anatomical, physiological, or psychological abnormalities which are demonstrable by medically acceptable clinical and laboratory diagnostic techniques,” 42 U.S.C. § 423 (d)(3), this does not mean that medical opinion must necessarily be supported by “objective” clinical or laboratory findings.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[w]hile the determination of another governmental agency that a social security disability benefits claimant is disabled is not binding on the Secretary, it is entitled to some weight and should be considered.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Havas v. Bowen · Penix v. Califano
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.