Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 709 F.2d 257 - Randall v. Lukhard

Randall v. Lukhard’s Empirical Analysis

709 F.2d 257 · 1983

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
4
states following
January 2011
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently January 2011 · most notably Virginia Hospital Ass'n v. Baliles (1989), Antrican v. Odom (2002)

18 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

3301983199020002010decided

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. § 1381 (§ 1601 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1382B (§ 1613 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1396A (§ 1902 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Edelman v. Jordan · Quern v. Jordan · Harris v. McRae · Board of Regents of Univ. of State of NY v. Tomanio

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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “challenges to the Virginia Medicaid program's former and current 'transfer of assets' eligibility rules, as applied to Medicaid applicants and recipients from April 24, 1978.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “include reasonable standards ... for determining eligibility for [Medicaid] ... which ... provide for taking into account only such income and resources as are, as determined in accordance with standards prescribed by the Secretary, available to the applicant or recipient and (in the case of any applicant or recipient who would, except for income and resources, be eligible ... to have paid with respect to him supplemental security income benefits ...) as would not be disregarded (or set aside for future needs) in determining his eligibility for [SSI]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “by including resources no longer 'actually available' to the applicant or recipient. It is apparent that resources that were previously irrevocably transferred to another person, regardless of the amount of compensation received, simply are no longer actually available.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.