Cunningham v. Toan’s Empirical Analysis
728 F.2d 1101 · 1984
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 401 (§ 201 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 408 (§ 208 of the Social Security Act of 1935) · 42 U.S.C. § 602 (§ 402 of the Social Security Act of 1935)
Relies on King v. Smith · Pomponio v. United States · Shea v. Vialpando · McCoog Ferguson v. Hegstrom · 383 F. Supp. 174 - Johnson v. Harder
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] state policy which removes from the representative payee the determination of when a beneficiary’s maintenance needs have been met, as well as the determination of what use of any surplus would be in the beneficiary’s best interest, is clearly inconsistent with [the representative payee’s] discretion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a]n agency's interpretation of its own regulations is entitled to deference by the courts, ... an agency's interpretations are not conclusive and courts are not bound by them.”
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.