Watters v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis
656 F.2d 234 · 1980
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 60 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably Bloodsworth v. Heckler (1983), Pugh v. Bowen (1989)
21 federal appellate · 4 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 Mathews v. Eldridge · Califano v. Sanders · Weinberger v. Salfi · Washington v. Confederated Bands & Tribes of the Yakima Indian Nation · Cappadora v. Celebrezze
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 60 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(W)ere we to recognize a rule authorizing judicial review of refusals to extend filing deadlines different from that imposed by the Supreme Court with regard to requests to reopen, claimants could circumvent the Sanders holding merely by filing for extensions.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Section 405(g) clearly limits judicial review to a particular type of agency action, a ‘final decision of the Secretary made after a hearing.’ As is true of a petition to reopen a prior decision, a request for an extension of time within which to request a hearing may be denied without a hearing. 42 U.S.C. § 405 (b). Section 405(b) requires that the Administration hold a hearing in only one instance — where an adverse ex parte determination on a claim for benefits has been made and timely request for a hearing on that claim has been filed. The opportunity to request an extension of time for complying with administrative filing deadlines and any hearing conducted to determine the propriety of such action are afforded by regulations of the Secretary and not compelled by statute. [Footnote omitted].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Section 405(h) provides as follows: The findings and decision of the Secretary after a hearing shall be binding upon all individuals who were parties to such hearing. No findings of fact or decision of the Secretary shall be reviewed by any person, tribunal, or governmental agency except as herein provided. No action against the United States, the Secretary, or any officer or employee thereof shall be brought under section 1331 or 1346 of Title 28 to recover on any claim arising under this sub-chapter.”
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.