Pelletier v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare’s Empirical Analysis
525 F.2d 158 · 1975
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 10 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently July 2018 · most notably 16272a Santiago v. Secretary of Health and Human Services (1991), Gray v. Heckler (1985)
31 federal appellate · 10 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
Relies on Miranda v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare · Hernandez v. Weinberger · Torres v. Celebrezze · Alejandro Gonzalez v. Elliot L. Richardson, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“resist translation into absolutes, . . . because social security proceedings are not strictly adversarial.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Grid, § "). The Grid is designed to help the Secretary, when appropriate, satisfy his burden of proving the existence of other jobs in the economy that the claimant can perform. Sherwin showed that he could not perform his prior job as a forklift operator; thus the Grid came into play. 5 The Grid is basically a matrix, combining different permutations of the four essential factors set out in the statute (age, education, work experience, and residual work capacity) and stating, as to each combination, whether a claimant with those characteristics is "disabled”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A claimant makes a prima facie showing of disability only by establishing “that he is unable to return to his former type of work.” Hernandez [v. Weinberger, 493 F.2d 1120 , 1122 (1st Cir. 1974)]; Torres v. Celebrezze, 349 F.2d 342 , 345 (1st Cir. 1965) (emphasis supplied). Thus to meet her initial burden it was not enough for Miss Pelletier to show simply that her specific job at Avco entailed exposure to smoke and fumes, she would have to show that such exposure would be a condition of this sort of work generally.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jock v. Harris
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.