Paris v. Schweiker’s Empirical Analysis
674 F.2d 707 · 1982
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently September 2003 · most notably Martonik v. Heckler (1985), Ruff v. Sullivan (1990)
14 federal appellate · 1 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 Landess v. Weinberger · Weber v. Harris · Woodard v. Schweiker · Heisner v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The determination of “medical equivalence” must include consideration of laboratory findings, medical observable facts and the claimant’s subjective description of impairments. 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1528-29 . Subjective symptoms alone might not be sufficient, but they must be given weight especially when corroborated by clinical or laboratory evaluations. Id. Here, Mrs. Paris concedes that no single impairment of hers is a listed impairment under the Secretary’s regulations. Her contention is that the aggregate of her impairments permanently preclude her from engaging in any gainful activity. The record clearly supports her contention.”
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.