Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 642 F.2d 700 - Cotter v. Harris

Cotter v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis

642 F.2d 700 · 1981

Citation profile

428
cited by 428 later decisions
4
states following
July 2019
most recently cited

82 federal appellate · 63 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 428 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably Podedworny v. Harris (1984), Kent v. Schweiker (1983)

82 federal appellate · 63 district · 4 state decisions

16001981199020002010decided

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 29 U.S.C. § 160 (§ 10 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 33 U.S.C. § 921 · 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) · 5 U.S.C. § 557 (Administrative Procedure Act of 1946)

Relies on Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation · Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Barrett v. United States · Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Ruckelshaus

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

  1. “duty to scrutinize the record as a whole to determine whether the conclusions reached are rational.”
    13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[i]n our view an examiner’s findings should be as comprehensive and analytical as feasible and, where appropriate, should include a statement of subordinate factual foundations on which ultimate factual conclusions are based, so that a reviewing court may know the basis for the decision. This is necessary so that the court may properly exercise its responsibility under 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g) to determine if the Secretary’s decision is supported by substantial evidence.”
    10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “more than a mere scintilla. It means such relevant evidence as a reasoning mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.”
    7 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.