Beatty v. Schweiker’s Empirical Analysis
678 F.2d 359 · 1982
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently September 2003
5 federal appellate · 3 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 42 U.S.C. § 1302 (§ 1102 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1382 (§ 1611 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1382B (§ 1613 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1383 (§ 1631 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Udall v. Tallman · Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co. · Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Milhollin · United States v. Larionoff · Alexander v. Gardner-Denver Co.
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[u]nspent SSI payments clearly fall within [the] definition”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Singer v. SSA
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.