Hames v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis
707 F.2d 162 · 1983
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 16 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 138 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably Trimiar v. Sullivan (1992), Johnson v. Bowen (1988)
11 federal appellate · 16 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 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 416 (§ 216 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Richardson v. Perales · Robles v. Finch · Dvorak v. Celebrezze · Emil C. Timmerman v. Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of H.E.W., Kenneth Marks v. Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of H.E.W.
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 138 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. It must do more than create a suspicion of the existence of the fact to be established, but “no substantial evidence” will be found only where there is a “conspicuous absence of credible choices” or “no contrary medical evidence.””
16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It must be remembered that an individual claiming disability insurance benefits under the Social Security Act has the burden of proving her disability. To meet her burden and establish disability under the Act, Plaintiff must prove that she is unable to engage in any substantial gainful activity. Plaintiff must also establish a physical impairment lasting at least twelve months that prevents her from engaging in substantial gainful activity.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Noble v. Astrue · Jones v. Astrue“constant, unremitting, and wholly unresponsive to therapeutic treatment.”
4 later decisions 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.