Daring v. Heckler’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 federal appellate · 7 district ·

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

1. “In reviewing final determinations by the Secretary after an administrative hearing, courts are bound by the Secretary’s findings of fact if they are supported by “substantial evidence.” 42 U.S.C. §§ 405 (g) (Supp. V 1981); 1383(c)(3) (1976). Substantial evidence has been defined as such evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 401 [ 91 S.Ct. 1420, 1427 , 28 L.Ed.2d 842 ] (1971); Dobrowolsky v. Califano, 606 F.2d 403, 406 (3d Cir.1979). A person is disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act “only if his physical or mental impairment or impairments are of such severity that he is not only unable to do his previous work but cannot, considering his age, education, and work experience, engage in any other kind of substantial gainful work which exists in the national economy.” 42 U.S.C.A. § 423 (d)(2)(A) (1983); 42 U.S.C. § 1382c(a)(3)(B) (1976). Under the Act, the burden of proof as to the medical basis of a finding of disability remains on the claimant at all times, both in the initial proceeding to establish disability and in a subsequent termination proceeding. Torres v. Schweiker, 682 F.2d 109, 111 (3d Cir.1982), cert. denied [— U.S. -] 103 S.Ct. 823 [ 74 L.Ed.2d 1020 ] (1983). If a claimant makes a showing that s/he is unable to return to a customary occupation, then the Secretary has the burden of proving that the claimant has the capacity to perform jobs that exist in the national econom”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Newhouse v. Heckler

2. “more than a mere scintilla. It means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Morales v. Apfel

3. “carry little weight in cases . . . involving medically substantiated psychiatric disability.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Morales v. Apfel