Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 721 F.2d 50 - Delamater v. Schweiker

Delamater v. Schweiker’s Empirical Analysis

721 F.2d 50 · 1983

Citation profile

53
cited by 53 later decisions
1
states following
February 2013
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 7 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently February 2013 · most notably Metromedia Co. v. Fugazy (1992), Ferraris v. Heckler (1984)

12 federal appellate · 7 district · 1 state decisions

2701983199020002010decided

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. § 401 (§ 201 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 405 (§ 205 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 421 (§ 221 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 423 (§ 223 of the Social Security Act of 1935)

Relies on Mathews v. Eldridge · Richardson v. Perales · United States v. Utah Construction & Mining Co. · Johnson v. United States · Simpson 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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[w]hen an administrative agency is acting in a judicial capacity and resolves disputed issues of fact properly before it which the parties have had an adequate opportunity to litigate, the courts have not hesitated to apply res judicata to enforce repose. (Citation omitted.) The implication of [this statement] is that if the administrative proceeding has not been of an adjudicative nature, a decision arrived at by the administrative agency cannot have res judicata effect ... An action taken by an administrative agency to grant or deny a benefit is not an adjudicated action unless the agency has made its decision using procedures substantially similar to those employed by the courts. (Citation omitted.) Use of such “adjudicative procedure ... is necessary to yield an adjudication that is binding under the rules of res judicata.” (Citation omitted.) Delamater, 721 F.2d at 53-54 .”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[A] decision by an administrative agency cannot be the basis for collateral estop-pel unless it was an adjudicative decision. An agency action granting or denying a privilege is not an adjudicative decision unless the agency has made its decision using procedures substantially similar to those employed by the courts.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “a period of disability ends if the medical or other evidence shows that [the claimant is] not disabled or if there is not enough evidence to support a finding that disability continues.”
    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.