Carter v. Schweiker’s Empirical Analysis
649 F.2d 937 · 1981
Citation profile
36
cited by 36 later decisions
July 1999
most recently cited
15 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · Parker v. Harris · Dobrowolsky v. Califano · Bastien v. Califano
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The court ... may at any time order additional evidence to be taken before the-Secretary, but only upon a showing that there is new evidence which is material and that there is good cause for the failure to incorporate such evidence into the record in a prior proceeding ...””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“As we have recently noted, the amendment 'was at least in part designed to limit federal court remands to the Secretary,'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A. Manifested persistence of one or more of the following clinical signs: 1. Demonstrable and persistent structural changes mediated through psychophysiological channels (e.g., duodenal ulcer); or 2. Recurrent and persistent periods of anxiety, with tension, apprehension, and interference with concentration and memory; or 3. Persistent depressive affect with insomnia, loss of weight, and suicidal preoccupation; or 4. Persistent phobic or obsessive ruminations with inappropriate, bizarre, or disruptive behavior; or 5. Persistent compulsive, ritualistic behavior; or 6. Persistent functional disturbance of vision, speech, hearing, or use of a limb with demonstrable structural or trophic changes; or 7. Persistent, deeply ingrained, maladaptive patterns of behavior manifested by either: a. Seclusiveness or autistic thinking; or b. Pathologically inappropriate suspiciousness or hostility; B. Resulting persistence of marked restriction of daily activities and constriction of interests and deterioration in personal habits and seriously impaired ability to relate to other people.”
1 later decision 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.