Parker v. Astrue’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 federal appellate ·

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 92 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “It is not only boilerplate; it is meaningless boilerplate.”

   11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Pepper v. Colvin · Suess v. Colvin

2. “We do not suggest that the absence of verifiable medical evidence of pain is an inadmissible consideration in a disability proceeding. In some cases, pain does have an objectively verifiable source, and if so the administrative law judge may certainly treat this as evidence that the claimant is disabled. And if the presence of objective indicators thus makes a claim more plausible, their absence makes it less so. It would be a mistake to say “there is no objective medical confirmation of the claimant’s pain; therefore the claimant is not in pain.” But it would be entirely sensible to say “there is no objective medical confirmation, and this reduces my estimate of the probability that the claim is true.” The administrative law judge said the first, not the second.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 26 F. Supp. 3d 798 - Larson v. Colvin

3. “the [ Securities and Exchange Commission v. ] Chenery [ Corp. , 318 U.S. 80 , 63 S.Ct. 454 , 87 L.Ed. 626 (1943) ] doctrine [ ] forbids an agency's lawyers to defend the agency's decision on grounds that the agency itself had not embraced”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 295 F. Supp. 3d 899 - Pulley v. Berryhill