Cotter v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis
650 F.2d 481 · 1981
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 6 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently October 2014 · most notably Stephens v. Heckler (1985), Adorno v. Shalala (1994)
7 federal appellate · 6 district ·
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
Relies on Barrett v. United States · Steadman v. Securities & Exchange Commission · Cotter v. Harris · Dobrowolsky v. Califano · Baerga v. Richardson
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In 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 ... decision is supported by substantial evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[t]he [Cotter ] opinion simply requires that the ALJ indicate that s/he has considered all the evidence, both for and against the claim, and provide some explanation of why s/he has rejected probative evidence which would have suggested a contrary disposition.the ALJ is not required to supply a comprehensive explanation for the rejection of evidence; in most cases, a sentence or short paragraph would probably suffice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Chanbunmy v. Astrue“'such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion,'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. Olsen v. Schweiker
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.