Epps v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis
624 F.2d 1267 · 1980
Citation profile
47 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 104 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Bloodsworth v. Heckler (1983), Newton v. Apfel (2000)
47 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 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 · Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · DePaepe v. Richardson · Simmons v. Harris
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 104 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“for a determination of the [claimant's] disability eligibility reached on the total record.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(t)he findings of the Secretary as to any fact, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be conclusive”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We are straitly confined by 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g) to determining, upon careful review of the entire record, whether it contained substantial evidence to support the Secretary’s findings____ This does not mean we affirm on gossamer. Substantial evidence is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Edwards v. Heckler
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.