Smith v. Schweiker’s Empirical Analysis
719 F.2d 723 · 1984
Citation profile
27 federal appellate · 12 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently March 2011 · most notably Hays v. Sullivan (1990), Bapp v. Bowen (1986)
27 federal appellate · 12 district · 1 state decisions
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. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on Local 408, International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. National Labor Relations Board · Heckler v. Campbell · Kirk v. Secretary of Health & Human Services · Hall v. Harris · Cummins v. Schweiker
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e cannot believe the grids are formulated to reflect the availability of jobs in the national economy only for physically impaired claimants with "entirely normal”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“whether a given nonexertional condition affects a particular claimant's residual capacity to engage in certain job activities is a question of fact.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“demonstrates the presence of nonexertional impairments, the Commissioner, in order to prevail, must be required to prove by expert vocational testimony that, despite [the claimant’s] combination of non-exertional and exertional impairments, specific jobs exist in the national economy which he can perform.”
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.