Hephner v. Mathews’s Empirical Analysis
574 F.2d 359 · 1978
Citation profile
132 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 324 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably Kirk v. Secretary of Health & Human Services (1981), Parker v. Harris (1980)
132 federal appellate ·
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. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Allen v. Weinberger · Oppenheim v. Finch · Massey v. Celebrezze · Lane 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 324 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a medical basis for an impairment that prevents him from engaging in his particular occupation,”
42 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“may not focus and base [its] decision entirely on a single piece of evidence, and disregard other pertinent evidence.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““A finding of a capability to do light work does not constitute evidence that a person can engage in substantial gainful activity, nor is such a finding sufficient to rebut a prima facie case disability. A claimant’s capacity to perform work must be evaluated in light of his age, his edu cation, his work experience, and his impairments, including his pain. This requires a finding of capacity to work which is expressed, not in terms of a vague catch-all phrase such as ‘light’ work, but in terms of specific types of jobs. [Citations omitted.]”
3 later decisions 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.