Tingus v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
2 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 401 (§ 201 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 Schweiker v. Hansen · National Labor Relations Board v. Brown · Rosenberg v. Richardson · Doran v. Schweiker · Broussard v. Weinberger
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Secretary’s reading is so narrow, however, that if it were adopted, no one would qualify for the extension. The extension provision comes into play only after a claimant’s disability has ended, because the 12-month application period does not start running until the disability period closes. The claimant with a disabling mental impairment has no need for the extension provision. Under the Secretary’s reading, though, only a claimant with a disabling mental impairment may utilize the extension provision. A statutory amendment clearly intended to provide extra protection for eligibility under a remedial statute cannot possibly be read so narrowly. A reasonable construction of the statue requires that the extension be available to those whose lack of mental capacity causes them to fail to file an application within the 12-month initial period.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Fletcher v. Chater
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.