United States v. California Care Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
709 F.2d 1241 · 1983
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently March 2005 · most notably Andrade v. Lauer (1984), Vinieratos v. United States, Department of the Air Force ex rel. Aldridge (1991)
20 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1345 · 28 U.S.C. § 1491 · 28 U.S.C. § 2415 · 28 U.S.C. § 455 · 42 U.S.C. § 1395I (§ 1817 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1395O (§ 1836 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Weinberger v. Salfi · Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc. · McKart v. United States · Ingraham v. Wright · Ryan v. United States
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) agency expertise makes agency consideration necessary to generate a proper record and reach a proper decision; (2) relaxation of the requirement would encourage the deliberate bypass of the administrative scheme; and (3) administrative review is likely to allow the agency to correct its own mistakes and to preclude the need for judicial review.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“a precondition to federal court jurisdiction”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Finality of [Secretary’s] decision. The findings and decisions of the [Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services] after a hearing shall be binding upon individuals who were parties to such hearing. No findings of fact or decisions 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[ 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 or 1346], to recover on any claim arising under this title.”
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.